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.

 

We Weren't Designed To Eat Meat, Here Is Proof

page: 35
46
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 06:02 PM
link   
We weren't DESIGNED for anything, period. We evolved, and we evolved to eat whatever we wanted to eat or was available.

End of thread.




posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:16 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
I took a look at the site but didn't see any bodybuilders of notable size. Could you post the photos or links to the photos? I have a great deal of experience with training bodybuilders including vegans. Vegans do have a huge disadvantage due to the lack of necessary complete proteins, minerals, etc... I've never seen a big vegan bodybuilder unless of course they were taking steroids, growth hormone, insulin, IGF-1 ,etc...

For example, I had one client who had great genetics but couldn't gain size. I asked him to include red meat, chicken and fish in his diet. After 6 months of this, his body weight increased by 40 lbs and his body fat decreased by 2%. He went from looking like a weekend weightlifter to a bodybuilder who could compete in amateur competitions.


Agreed, i looked on the site and whilst there are some big guys, they are not the standard that enter the competitions and win. If they ate a little bit of lean meat, then they'd increase their size, it's a guarentee. That's why they all eat meat in the big leagues, it's not a choice it's the fact they have to to win.

The client you mention i think proves this, whist everyones dietary needs are different, when it comes to things like bodybuilding there are general set rules. The fact people are still arguing this amazes me and shows they don't want to face the truth. That the human body is naturally omnivorous and it stands to reason it would function best when given the diet it evolved to use.

That's not saying in our western society you should eat meat however, if you choose not to then good for you. However please don't tell use flesh rippers, as you so like to call us, that we're ignorant, cruel or evil. That's my major problem with the vegetarians and vegans in general. Some of us meat eaters don't have a go at you so please don't have a go at us.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cythraul
I didn't say plants don't feel anything. I said they're not sentient beings. I learnt long ago never to claim "plants don't have feelings" because some smart anti-vegetarian always likes to come along with the old "but scientists say plants DO feel pain" argument. The interpretation of pain is defined by the senses. When a chicken is electrocuted on a production line it feels, sees and hears the whole horrible experience. Pain might be universal, but suffering is exclusive to sentient beings.

As for land use and the environment, well:
- It takes more than 2,400 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of cow flesh, whereas it takes about 180 gallons of water to make 1 pound of whole wheat flour.
- It takes fifteen times as much land to produce food for a meat eater than it does to produce food for a vegan.



Okay, well back tracking and flip floping on the first issue, my point is we are all living things. I don't understand why the defensive posture in this paticular thread. I wasn't attacking the usage of plants, it is you that attacks the meat eater. I respect your point of view to only eat vegetables, as I EXPECT you to respect me on those days I eat nothing but meat!

The environmental impact is a ridiculous arguement. I know every info you read vegan claims the cattle are more of an impact. They've never caused the biggest over farming blunder in the history of the world as our own dust bowl did. Let me give you facts of farming in my region. Our cattle range on mauch undisturbed land, that which is disturbed is converted Rice Field land. The hay grown for feed is barren, abandoned rice field land caused from the collapse of our farmers industry. We can't afford to clear all trees for our crops, build levees, divert water, and then find out everybody vegetarian doesn't buy American. It's a gamble we won't take; the finacial pressure doesn't exist with cattle, very little is imported.

As for the water facts they are completly bogus. An uncle just planted 50 acres of rice which is flooded for the entire growth cycle.

--50 Acres of rice requires 8 inches of water that's 1,357,714.50 gal. of water.

---Vs--- 1,200 or so gals., per year for 1000 head of cattle which also drink from ponds and stagnated useless water. We draw the extra from a well.

That's facts for my area production!!



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by azblack
 


An absolutely superb bit of information, especially about the rice. I completely forgot that rice uses so much water. Water is currently one of the resources governments and people are getting worried about. Clean fresh water is becoming harder and harder to supply. In the area i'm in they have very old victorian aquafiers. They marked the level every year for nearly 100 years and something has been seen clearly. In the last 10 years the levels that are replenished each year aren't enough to bring it back to the old level. In fact it's going down each and every year. The news reporter stood inside the underground building and made a clear point, that if he'd been there 10 years earlier he would have had 10 feet of water above his head.

The enviromental arguement is a very complex one, and it's not as easy as vegetarians and vegans seem to think. It's not all the meat eaters fault, the vegetables and fruits are very difficult to grow in some areas, require heavy fetilization and/or large amounts of water.

Around here the farms often use scrub land to graze cattle. This land is useless for crops, if you wanted to farm it you'd have to clear it properly and then use every fertilizer known to man to get the soil to accept any kind of crop. The cows however are quite happy to roam around, eat the poor, thin grasses that grow, dig up the odd plant that manages to grow in the poor soil, and generally make use of the area.

If it wasn't used for raising cattle then it would be quite useless, abandoned land. So meat production isn't always a bad thing.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by MischeviousElf
 


www.fromthewilderness.com...

heres a quote

In the United States, 400 gallons of oil equivalents are expended annually to feed each American (as of data provided in 1994).7 Agricultural energy consumption is broken down as follows:

· 31% for the manufacture of inorganic fertilizer

· 19% for the operation of field machinery

· 16% for transportation

· 13% for irrigation

· 08% for raising livestock (not including livestock feed)

· 05% for crop drying

· 05% for pesticide production

· 08% miscellaneous8

Energy costs for packaging, refrigeration, transportation to retail outlets, and household cooking are not considered in these figures.

To give the reader an idea of the energy intensiveness of modern agriculture, production of one kilogram of nitrogen for fertilizer requires the energy equivalent of from 1.4 to 1.8 liters of diesel fuel

that sure is a lot of energy consumption just for growing plants.


According to The Fertilizer Institute (www.tfi.org...), in the year from June 30 2001 until June 30 2002 the United States used 12,009,300 short tons of nitrogen fertilizer.10 Using the low figure of 1.4 liters diesel equivalent per kilogram of nitrogen, this equates to the energy content of 15.3 billion liters of diesel fuel, or 96.2 million barrels.


thats alot of oil


Modern intensive agriculture is unsustainable. Technologically-enhanced agriculture has augmented soil erosion, polluted and overdrawn groundwater and surface water, and even (largely due to increased pesticide use) caused serious public health and environmental problems. Soil erosion, overtaxed cropland and water resource overdraft in turn lead to even greater use of fossil fuels and hydrocarbon products. More hydrocarbon-based fertilizers must be applied, along with more pesticides; irrigation water requires more energy to pump; and fossil fuels are used to process polluted water.


so your polluting the environment, using all the water, causing health problems and eroding the soil, just to grow plants


It takes 500 years to replace 1 inch of topsoil.21 In a natural environment, topsoil is built up by decaying plant matter and weathering rock, and it is protected from erosion by growing plants. In soil made susceptible by agriculture, erosion is reducing productivity up to 65% each year.22 Former prairie lands, which constitute the bread basket of the United States, have lost one half of their topsoil after farming for about 100 years. This soil is eroding 30 times faster than the natural formation rate.23 Food crops are much hungrier than the natural grasses that once covered the Great Plains. As a result, the remaining topsoil is increasingly depleted of nutrients. Soil erosion and mineral depletion removes about $20 billion worth of plant nutrients from U.S. agricultural soils every year.24 Much of the soil in the Great Plains is little more than a sponge into which we must pour hydrocarbon-based fertilizers in order to produce crops.


so was it over grazing or over farming causing erosion? dust bowl anyone?


Modern agriculture also places a strain on our water resources. Agriculture consumes fully 85% of all U.S. freshwater resources



A corn crop that produces 118 bushels/acre/year requires more than 500,000 gallons/acre of water during the growing season. The production of 1 pound of maize requires 1,400 pounds (or 175 gallons) of water.29 Unless something is done to lower these consumption rates, modern agriculture will help to propel the United States into a water crisi


so i can produce quotes just like you, except mine arent from a biased source trying to support their agenda.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   
double post, sorry

[edit on 20-6-2008 by tdubz]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by tdubz
 

Personally, I support permaculture practices over monsanto-style agribusiness.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 01:04 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 
Although off topic I can further that by saying every week the evaporation rate for my area over that 50 acres, or any volume for that matter, ONE WEEK IS 27000 GALS PER ACRE, an inch a week.

I can't let people de-rail my true point:

I eat meat and I feel most heathy when meat is plentiful, Whether or not my body is designed for it, it's not unhealthy which brings me to my next point.

All people are different. I believe, based off my blood type, I'm best suited with meat intake. I've heard all the other arguements to the contrary and they're logicaly flawed and can be systematically ruled out.

The largest concern is where you're food comes from, that's the only arguement I can accept against the cattle industry but ONLY VEAL bothers me. I know my meat isn't mistreated before I kill it and eat it, which really is a wierd statement. I also know my vegies aren't over fertilized or mistreated before I kill and eat it.

You can raised 5 cattle on 20 acres here and never have to buy hay or water them. Every year we try to drop one calf, slaughter the adult you're back to 5 w/ meat for all year. A garden of 30ftx40ft keeps me fed. I shoot or catch the rest of the meat the way it's supposed to be.
My point is feed yourself or buy American, if you're not doing those things no one should argue with a person like me about food, there should be a law against it.


Side note: the great republicans vetoed the farm bill all year but left farmers in limbo. Every one rushed to get crops in the ground so they wouldn't starve to death. These are farmers who want to produce food for us, the govt. told them not to, but apparently forgot to tell them they needed to get back to what they want to do. What a country!!



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Danger Girl
 


I personaly love all animals and when i was younger i didnt like to eat meat but as i got older i realized that its just nature eat other animals.

is it wrong for a vulture to eat a dead animal corpse?

its already dead might as well take advantage of it...cant let it go to waste.


[edit on 20-6-2008 by wizzyG]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 

Ok, take a look at the pics about halfway down this thread:
vegan fitness

It's only logical that there are a lack of successful vegan bodybuilders - because only a tiny fraction of all people are vegan and the fraction of bodybuilders who are vegan less still because of the preconception that there's no point bodybuilding if you're vegan. Additionally, when you're trying to build muscle, regular good quality meals (7 a day) - whether you're at home or out - are easier and quicker to come by if you're a meat-eater. In short, vegans have the odds vastly stacked against them. That being said, without steroids, there is a limit to the size one can gain and I believe it's entirely possible to reach that size as a vegan. It might take longer but it's do-able. Meat is a kind of short-cut but even if I was a meat-eater, I wouldn't want to put my body through the strain of eating as much of it as a bodybuilder does. All the nutrition necessary to build muscle is found in vegetables, grains, nuts and beans. It just requires more time and attention as opposed to picking up a slab of meat and throwing it into a pan. Additionally, vegan's tend to be more conscious about what they put in their bodies so you'll pretty much never find one on steroids.

The guy in the pictures I linked to is living proof.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 05:22 AM
link   
[edit on 20-6-2008 by jfj123]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

Originally posted by jfj123
I took a look at the site but didn't see any bodybuilders of notable size. Could you post the photos or links to the photos? I have a great deal of experience with training bodybuilders including vegans. Vegans do have a huge disadvantage due to the lack of necessary complete proteins, minerals, etc... I've never seen a big vegan bodybuilder unless of course they were taking steroids, growth hormone, insulin, IGF-1 ,etc...

For example, I had one client who had great genetics but couldn't gain size. I asked him to include red meat, chicken and fish in his diet. After 6 months of this, his body weight increased by 40 lbs and his body fat decreased by 2%. He went from looking like a weekend weightlifter to a bodybuilder who could compete in amateur competitions.


Agreed, i looked on the site and whilst there are some big guys, they are not the standard that enter the competitions and win. If they ate a little bit of lean meat, then they'd increase their size, it's a guarentee. That's why they all eat meat in the big leagues, it's not a choice it's the fact they have to to win.

The client you mention i think proves this, whist everyones dietary needs are different, when it comes to things like bodybuilding there are general set rules. The fact people are still arguing this amazes me and shows they don't want to face the truth. That the human body is naturally omnivorous and it stands to reason it would function best when given the diet it evolved to use.

That's not saying in our western society you should eat meat however, if you choose not to then good for you. However please don't tell use flesh rippers, as you so like to call us, that we're ignorant, cruel or evil. That's my major problem with the vegetarians and vegans in general. Some of us meat eaters don't have a go at you so please don't have a go at us.


The only person I saw on the site who was decent was the guy on the round GIF but he doesn't count as he's taking steroids
You can eat anything you want and make decent gains when you're juicing



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by azblack
Every year we try to drop one calf, slaughter the adult you're back to 5 w/ meat for all year. A garden of 30ftx40ft keeps me fed. I shoot or catch the rest of the meat the way it's supposed to be.

So as long as someone isn't telling you not to eat meat, do you agree that it is worth trying to reduce cruelty to animals? For example, do you think it is worth offering alternatives to practices such as feedlots and battery eggs?

edit: re your blood type, what is it?

[edit on 20-6-2008 by Shar_Chi]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cythraul
reply to post by jfj123
 

Ok, take a look at the pics about halfway down this thread:
vegan fitness

He has decent size but keep in mind that he's taking steroids. It's very easy to tell he's not natural and when you're juicing, you can eat whatever you want and make decent gains.


It's only logical that there are a lack of successful vegan bodybuilders - because only a tiny fraction of all people are vegan and the fraction of bodybuilders who are vegan less still because of the preconception that there's no point bodybuilding if you're vegan.

There's a reason for that. Being a vegan is a detriment to a bodybuilder for a myriad of reasons. Even many vegan bodybuilders take supplements to try and make up for the deficiencies including creatine monohydrate, protein drinks, various other legal supplements.


Additionally, when you're trying to build muscle, regular good quality meals (7 a day) - whether you're at home or out - are easier and quicker to come by if you're a meat-eater.

Not so, there are plenty of options and typically bodybuilders don't eat out especially close to competition. They prepare meals for the day or week and take them with them.


In short, vegans have the odds vastly stacked against them. That being said, without steroids, there is a limit to the size one can gain

Yes and no. There's always a limit regardless of pharmacuticals.


and I believe it's entirely possible to reach that size as a vegan.

Unlikely unless drugs are involved.


It might take longer but it's do-able.

Interesting point you just made. If being a vegan is the way to go, then why would it take longer for a vegan to gain muscle then an omnivore?


Meat is a kind of short-cut

How is eating meat a shortcut?


but even if I was a meat-eater, I wouldn't want to put my body through the strain of eating as much of it as a bodybuilder does.

Bodybuilders don't necessarily eat massive amounts of food. The ones that do (ie 10,000 Kcal/day) are pro athletes on drugs and the least of the concerns they have is how extra food puts a bit of stress on their bodies.


All the nutrition necessary to build muscle is found in vegetables, grains, nuts and beans.

Unfortunately this isn't really correct and you know it or you wouldn't have made the following statements:
"Meat is a kind of short-cut"
"It might take longer but it's do-able"


It just requires more time and attention as opposed to picking up a slab of meat and throwing it into a pan.

This is not what most bodybuilders do. This is a misconception promoted by vegans.


Additionally, vegan's tend to be more conscious about what they put in their bodies

I doubt vegan bodybuilders in general are more conscious about what they put in their bodes then meat eating bodybuilders.


so you'll pretty much never find one on steroids.

Do me a favor, provide me a number of decent size vegan bodybuilders and I'll tell you which ones are on steroids. I'm willing to guess even before seeing the photos that the majority of successful vegan bodybuilders are taking steroids.


The guy in the pictures I linked to is living proof.

It's easy to tell he's taking steroids. Not because of his size but because the types of striations he has, skin color and condition, etc...



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 

Actually, the guy clearly states in the thread that he doesn't take supplements or steroids. You could, obviously, conclude that he's lying but then that's an easy way to blunt my argument isn't it. If I showed you a line-up of vegan bodybuilders you could claim that they're all on steroids - and your only reason for doing so would be because of your belief that it's impossible to achieve a big physique naturally on a vegan diet.

Don't get me wrong, I DO believe that it's easier to bodybuild on an omnivorous diet. Essentially, while I'm not any kind of expert, meat contains large amounts of complete protein and other useful properties that induce testosterone - this is because meat is - put quite crudely - pre-grown flesh. If you want a great garden quickly, you plant it with pre-grown trees and plants, you don't sow it with seeds. However, with the right kind of patience and attention, plant-based foods will provide you with all of the necessary building blocks. As I’ve said earlier in the thread, no-one goes vegan because it helps bodybuilding. Like me, they are vegans first and bodybuilders second. When you start off, everyone tells you you can’t build muscle on a vegan diet but those who try are usually surprised at just how doable it is. You might have missed it, but earlier in the thread I stated that I DO believe humans are natural omnivores. I am vegan because I totally disagree with factory farming, NOT because I believe eating meat is unnatural. Nevertheless, I am living proof that you can survive – nay, thrive - on a vegan diet without supplements.


[edit on 20/6/2008 by Cythraul]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


Yeah i had that feeling when i looked at the one big guy, his skin just doesn't seem right and whilst i've seen big veins and arteries on bodybuilders, steroid induced growth always looks slightly odd.

The reason he used phrases like "short cut" are becuase he has to acknowledge something, that meat contains all of the necessary proteins and minerals required for muscular growth. It's a very dense form of protein and muscle growing nutrients.

To get a complete protein vegans have to eat a wide variety of things. Now lets say we have an average bodybuilder eating 4 meals a day, he's not hardcore. We also have a egan bodybuilder eating 4 meals a day. the meat eater will probably be putting meat in most of those meals, he therefore has a nutrient dense intake. Lots of complete proteins, lots of minerals and vitamins.

The vegan will have to mix and match foods to get the same amounts of protein, in fact a vegan would have to add an extra meal or two. Whilst beans and pulses are packed with proteins (in some case more packed per gram than meat), these proteins are not complete. So to get the same amount you have to add more meals because the stomach can only contain so much food.

When you talk about competition level bodybuilders, they have to eat a lot, and they need that nutrient dense food. I think vegetarians could manage it, if they eat fish and eggs. However i find vegetarians that eat fish complete hypocrits.

When you said about bodybuilders throwing meat in the pan, this is quite wrong. Grilling, steaming, poaching, these are three of the main ways of cooking for these people. It reduces the fat, and preserves the main nutrients.



Originally posted by Cythraul
Additionally, when you're trying to build muscle, regular good quality meals (7 a day) - whether you're at home or out - are easier and quicker to come by if you're a meat-eater.


You know nearly every gym i've been in has vegan and vegetarian meals. The gyms have treadmills and bike for the aerobic workouts and so they know that many of the people coming there are vegans because they think it's healthier. So they supply the correct foods. I would like ot point out that whilst it's shown vegans and vegetarians are less inclined to get many diseases, the studies are often flawed. They usually compare them to heavy meat eaters instead of careful meat eaters.


Originally posted by Cythraul
All the nutrition necessary to build muscle is found in vegetables, grains, nuts and beans.


Yes it is but because you have to combine those foods it means you would be eating even more and it would get to the point where you just couldn't eat enough using a vegan diet.


Originally posted by Cythraul
Additionally, vegan's tend to be more conscious about what they put in their bodies so you'll pretty much never find one on steroids.


Forgive me for saing this, but that's seriously ignorant. Bodybuilders at the top level are all using steroids, every last one of them. Whether vegan or not i don't care, you will not achieve that size without steroids. Other than drugs bodybuilders take incredible care with what they put into their bodies because they have to maintain a seriously low body fat ratio. They need high levels or vitamins and minerals to maintain their size as well.


The point is and we've shown it scientifically here, and even you have admitted that meat is a "short cut", is that the body needs meat for optimal performance. Yes you can live and be very healthy eating only a vegan or vegetarian diet, however your body will only operate at it's peak when you have meat.

The fact you used the phrase "short cut" in regards to meat, shows me you know we're correct on this issue but you just can't let go of it because you want there to be a scientific reason for veganism. It is in my view not based on any science only a moral conviction, however that doesn't mean it's wrong. If you want to be a vegan please go ahead, just don't try and bring in fslse science and biased research.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 06:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 

You seriously need to read what I've written more carefully. I've never said humans aren't natural omnivores. My very first post in the thread back on page 4 or 5 attests to this. I said "short cut" because it's easier to build muscle on a meat diet. I've never claimed any different and I've not once contradicted myself.

As for what vegan's put in their body, I've frequented both vegan bodybuilding forums and non-vegans ones. On the non-vegan ones, steroid use is a widely accepted "norm" whereas on the vegan one, people are proud to use the phrase "natural". Besides this, many people go vegan purely for health reasons so it goes without saying that many vegans are very health conscious. I'm certainly infintely more health conscious than my friends. I'm not saying ALL meat-eaters are unhealthy hedonists, I'm just saying that it is my observation that vegans/vegetarians tend to be more health conscious.

My continuing argument is quite simply that veganism is a healthy, productive diet - whether you're a bodybuilder or not. I'm not claiming that anyone is better off being vegan, just that they're equally well equipped. It seems that it is you who cannot accept this. You've maintained your ground and I mine, and now you're coming for an extra slice because for some strange reason you want me to admit that a vegan diet is no good for you. I'm not claiming an omnivorous diet is bad for you so why are you so desperate to convince me that a vegan one is so bad for me? I'm living proof that it's not and none of your science can change that.

[edit on 20/6/2008 by Cythraul]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cythraul
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 

You seriously need to read what I've written more carefully. I've never said humans aren't natural omnivores. My very first post in the thread back on page 4 or 5 attests to this. I said "short cut" because it's easier to build muscle on a meat diet. I've never claimed any different and I've not once contradicted myself.


I never claimed at any point in that post you had said we wern't meant to be omnivorous. I know you accept that we're designed to eat meat so please don't put words in my mouth. When you say "short cut" you are basically undermining the fact that meat is required for optimal performance of the human body. Therefore it is my view based on science that a small amount of meat in the diet will make you more healthy, not less. Note i say small, not saying you should eat it with every meal.


Originally posted by Cythraul
As for what vegan's put in their body, I've frequented both vegan bodybuilding forums and non-vegans ones. On the non-vegan ones, steroid use is a widely accepted "norm" whereas on the vegan one, people are proud to use the phrase "natural". Besides this, many people go vegan purely for health reasons so it goes without saying that many vegans are very health conscious. I'm certainly infintely more health conscious than my friends. I'm not saying ALL meat-eaters are unhealthy hedonists, I'm just saying that it is my observation that vegans/vegetarians tend to be more health conscious.


Out of sheer interest i've been on a number of forums, lurking rather than posting. I will repeat what i said earlier, to be a top bodybuilder you will have to use steroids. So it stands to reason that because the meat eating forums have the top bodybuilders, they would talk of steroids. I don't agree with steroid use by the way, i would never do such a thing, however i'm just saying the top bodybuilders all use them if you have an honest chat with them.

Vegans may be less inclined to use them, until they hit the top echelons of bodybuilding, however i doubt a vegan ever will simply because their bodies will not allow it on their restricted diet.


Originally posted by Cythraul
My continuing argument is quite simply that veganism is a healthy, productive diet - whether you're a bodybuilder or not. I'm not claiming that anyone is better off being vegan, just that they're equally well equipped. It seems that it is you who cannot accept this. You've maintained your ground and I mine, and now you're coming for an extra slice because for some strange reason you want me to admit that a vegan diet is no good for you. I'm not claiming an omnivorous diet is bad for you so why are you so desperate to convince me that a vegan one is so bad for me? I'm living proof that it's not and none of your science can change that.


Emphasis is mine. I NEVER said that and i'm tired of you putting words in my mouth. I am not saying a vegan diet is no good for you, i never said that at all at any point. I said it isn't the optimal diet, that doesn't mean you couldn't live a healthy, ripe old age with it. It doesn't mean you couldn't obtain a decent siize from it. It simply means you will never achieve what a meat eater would achieve under similar circumstances.

Again, please do NOT put words in my mouth, it isn't fair.




Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
The point is and we've shown it scientifically here, and even you have admitted that meat is a "short cut", is that the body needs meat for optimal performance. Yes you can live and be very healthy eating only a vegan or vegetarian diet, however your body will only operate at it's peak when you have meat.


I apologise for quoting myself, seems very arrogant but i wanted to show again i never said veganism was not good for you.

[edit on 20-6-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 07:28 AM
link   
I haven’t read the whole thread so if i repeat this, sorry bout that.

I am sick to death of this discussion, Vegetarians & Vegans are like Non~smokers who try & impose their will on every other fool who will listen.

You can put to one side the Canine teeth / forward facing eyes / micro nutrient deficiencies, etc......
Our bodies are made up of PROTEIN + WATER !!.
That Protein is being turned over every day, cells die & are replicated.
We need a CONSTANT DAILY supply of the right Amino acids, or our bodies CAN NOT make human proteins.
Why do you think every long term Vegetarian you see holds very little lean tissue on their bodies ??, show me a vegetarian Body Builder, you can’t as it’s impossible.

Now, Vegetables / grain / Legumes, DO NOT contain the right Amino acid profile for us to make human protiens.............END OF THREAD !!.




top topics



 
46
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join