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.

 

Eating Animals is Making us Sick

page: 28
27
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd


You're no better than the scientists and nutritionists that adhere to a hypothesis blindly. According to this post alone, you simply dismiss any information that conflicts with your hypothesis.

The integrity of studies have been proven to be compromized in the past, and in the future to come; however, this is no reason to simply dismiss all studies as irrelavent.


I don't adhere to any hypothesis blindly, did you read over the part where i have done the experimentation on myself? I've tried almost every single diet except for an all meat diet long term and the only thing that works is a high carb, low fat raw diet. Every other diet has either completely aggravated my IBS i used to have or made me feel lackluster. I also take a habit of monitoring what other people do and how they eat, I've come to the overwhelming conclusion that 99% of peoples problems are diet related.

I don't prescribe to the theory that we are all somehow different therefore all need different diets, we are all the same species and will all thrive on the same exact diet just like every other animal.

The only mainstream nutrition info you can look to for facts is stuff that pre-dates 1930 but even a lot of this info is assumption based and probably skewed. You and truetruth can believe all the BS modern day scientist tell you but i have an overwhelming feeling 95% of it is false.


No one gets sick from fruits, vegetables, nuts or seeds. Its a fact.



Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvdThis is an utter lie.


Prove it??? FYI using an example of contaminated e.coli spinach has nothing to do with the vegetables. Show me proof of a illness, disease or sickness directly related to eating fresh uncontaminated vegetables



Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
I've seen 300 pound people that have never touched McDonalds, and I've talked to them personally and counseled them. I've spoken with 300 pound vegetarians. What's you're point?


Lets see these 300 pound vegetarians, i highly doubt it. People that were 300 pounds before they went on the vegetarian diet don't count



Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
Meat consumption has NEVER been accurately associated with heart disease. It has loosely been associated with cancer and tumors, and I mean very loosely. And arthritis? LOL. et cetera? I assume you mean diabetes and obesity. Well, they are not associated with protein and fat consumption either.


I've seen meat associated with every single one of those diseases. I've seen time and time again people that eliminate just one thing from there diet, meat, and they get healed of almost every single sickness they suffer



Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
It's funny, because you say you "know" your diet is healthy, and you say it is because you've experimented, yet you truely have no idea how it will affect you in the long term. Take your measures and experiment as you will but you will never understand the physiology of human beings until you learn how to evalutate the literature.


Actually i do know because this is the diet that humans have subsisted on for millions of years, our closest relatives thrive on this diet, i receive every vitamin and mineral in ample quantities and have more vitality/energy then i have ever experienced in my whole life.

If you think humans are meant to eat meat do a little experiment for me, go make a crude spear or knife, chase down a large animal such as a deer and manage to kill it. Come back to me and let me know when you succeeded


Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
My diet, though I've refrained from exposing it, consists of fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds and various animal products. I strive to only consume whole foods and stay away from processed foods, if possible.

My anecdotal evidence is truely irrelavent to the conversation; however, meat consumption has, if anything, helped me in my progression towards a healthier lifestyle.


Seems you are on a healthy path but do yourself a favor buy the 80/10/10 diet book, try the diet to the tee for just 2 months and then see how you feel.



Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
Based on what data? Or, since you like to provide Op-Ed articles, based on what opinion articles?


Based on the fact that 75% of people are overweight, the number one killer is heart disease, life expectancy is falling and we have the laziest generation of human beings ever. These people all one thing in common, meat consumption




posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueTruth

i will never understand the hostility towards science - and in its place, the blind faith in beliefs based on nothing but hunches and personal opinions.

in this day and age, it's just plain inexcusable. somebody did that kid a disservice in his education. minimally, students need to be able to know how to read and evaluate a scientific paper - even if they aren't expert in the field.



Modern day science is a farce, as is school. Part of the governments plan to keep people like you retarded and believing what they want you to think.

You won't see this because your a moron who can't take any criticism on a forum so you rather just be a baby and use the ignore button.



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Hempseed nuts are incredibly delicious. I just bought some. They are 100% complete protein and rich in omega 3 and 6. I will be soon making some raw seed crackers and find other ways to eat them than my protein replacement "snack": cheese, drizzled in the juice of my pickled olives with several tablespoons seeds on top. Wonderful. My son is crazy about this too.

With hemp around I certainly don't see any reason for red meat.

[edit on 3-12-2009 by Unity_99]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by dzonatas

... can't wait for the day you enter an emergency room and say you are sick and the doctor replies... "Sorry, we can't take your anecdotal evidence that you are sick. Come back when you have grounded scientific proof."


Please explain to me how diagnosing a disease based on an individual's symptoms and dismissing anecdotal evidence as proof of a scientific hypothesis have anything in common. This is an horribly constructed analogy.


I do know of one famous ballplayer that fell dead on the field and Big Pharma stepped in to do a review and blamed it all on a particular substance found in his body at the time. This lead to the substance being banned. Oh ya, that was really scientific proof that the substance cause his death and therefore nobody should have access to it! Well, nobody except Big Pharma. Don't you love that anecdotal fine print!

That is just one case of how turn a conspiracy theory into a conspiracy fact, especially when people get prescribed with higher dosage amount to take on a daily basis than that ballplayer ever did. For some reason, they don't fall over dead like the ballplayer.

I'm sure that is enough evidence to question the studies funded by big business.

Earlier in this thread it was stated that vegetarians need supplements. That "need" is questionable if done in attempts like above where they take a more natural resource off the shelf in order to sell it as a supplement.

Isn't that the goal of big business? To patent natural resources? To make money?


I understand that industry support in scientific studies can negatively affect research integrity. But to simply dismiss all studies because of this small occurence is ludicrous.

-Dev



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rawhemp

Originally posted by TrueTruth

i will never understand the hostility towards science - and in its place, the blind faith in beliefs based on nothing but hunches and personal opinions.

in this day and age, it's just plain inexcusable. somebody did that kid a disservice in his education. minimally, students need to be able to know how to read and evaluate a scientific paper - even if they aren't expert in the field.



Modern day science is a farce, as is school. Part of the governments plan to keep people like you retarded and believing what they want you to think.

You won't see this because your a moron who can't take any criticism on a forum so you rather just be a baby and use the ignore button.



Science is a farce? That's profoundly ignorant. You're using a computer, right? Thank science.

Human beings (in America) live roughly 20 years longer, on average, than they did 100 years ago. Thank science.

I noticed in your profile you like skateboarding. Well, thank science for the materials used to make your board - unless that is you personally fashioned the wheels out of coconuts or something.


I can't even believe you just said that. I think you should consider smoking a little less weed.


If you got rid of everything in your life that came from science, I doubt you last a week.

ps - obviously, you're off ignore now. you can call me all the names you want, but someday, if you grow up, you'll learn that it's good to take a break from things in life that are annoying,.












[edit on 4-12-2009 by TrueTruth]

[edit on 4-12-2009 by TrueTruth]

[edit on 4-12-2009 by TrueTruth]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rawhemp

I don't adhere to any hypothesis blindly, did you read over the part where i have done the experimentation on myself? I've tried almost every single diet except for an all meat diet long term and the only thing that works is a high carb, low fat raw diet. Every other diet has either completely aggravated my IBS i used to have or made me feel lackluster.


It works for you. That's great. Your individual experiences, unless observed and documented by an unbiased, outside source and combined with other observations of the like, don't hold water in a scientific discussion. This is why I haven't provided mine.

But if I were to believe you and take your word I would still have a problem with you stating you've tried every diet long term. That's ridiculous. You've tried every diet for 20+ years?

In any case, it's still observational.

I mean, I've seen people success treating their IBS while consuming ample amounts of meat. You say meat causes it, and many others say meat has not affect.



I also take a habit of monitoring what other people do and how they eat, I've come to the overwhelming conclusion that 99% of peoples problems are diet related.


I would agree that their problems are dietarily related. But, you monitor people? Do you follow people around and see what they eat? You despise doctors and health authorities so I assume you don't work in any field that would require you to evaluate obese/sick individuals and reccomend a solution.

I DO evaluate/consult overweight individuals and suggest solutions but my experiences are irrelavent to this discussion.

Surely you're confusing monitoring and observing.

Once again, you're simply providing me with your observations.


I don't prescribe to the theory that we are all somehow different therefore all need different diets, we are all the same species and will all thrive on the same exact diet just like every other animal.


I agree. But you have to realize that when you're simply making correlations, as you have repeatedly done, you're providing yourself with a hypothesis, not a cause.

The problem with experimenting with yourself or providing anecdotal evidence is the amount of factors that can be lost or purposefully withheld and the fact that underlying conditions can play a huge role in results observed. Without proper evaluation of multiple observations, a hypothesis is even a rarity.


The only mainstream nutrition info you can look to for facts is stuff that pre-dates 1930 but even a lot of this info is assumption based and probably skewed.


I would say that a lot of research is ignored and dismissed, especially those papers and studies from pre-WWII Germany and Austria. The idea that the research was, however, assumptive and skewed is quite a stretch. The assumptions were only present due to the lack of technology, which has now confirmed many of these unproven hypotheses.


You and truetruth can believe all the BS modern day scientist tell you but i have an overwhelming feeling 95% of it is false.

Most of the work I've read has been from the past. From 200 years ago to a couple of years ago. Examining the history of nutritional science and how we came to believe what we do.

And your "feeling" is 95% of your problem. You've already decided what's right and nothing will convince you otherwise. Nothing. Your cynical attitude perpetuates your dogmatic beliefs.


Prove it??? FYI using an example of contaminated e.coli spinach has nothing to do with the vegetables. Show me proof of a illness, disease or sickness directly related to eating fresh uncontaminated vegetables


Allergies, sensitivities and intolerances.



Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
I've seen 300 pound people that have never touched McDonalds, and I've talked to them personally and counseled them. I've spoken with 300 pound vegetarians. What's you're point?


Lets see these 300 pound vegetarians, i highly doubt it. People that were 300 pounds before they went on the vegetarian diet don't count


See what I mean. My observations mean nothing to you, why should yours mean anything to me, or any researcher? You quickly pointed out a factor I could have easily overlooked. Just as you could easily overlook a factor when observing or experimenting yourself.


I've seen meat associated with every single one of those diseases. I've seen time and time again people that eliminate just one thing from there diet, meat, and they get healed of almost every single sickness they suffer


You've seen meat ASSOCIATED with diseases based on OBSERVATIONS. Most of them are very loose correlations. And none of those associations have been clinically tested, or even close. And there isn't even a biochemical/physiological effect that is given to explain some of these observations. I know, I've seen them all.

And, once again, you're observing people that eliminate meat and are healed, but how sure are you that they didn't cut out that baked potato with the steak? Another observation.....another lack of causality.


Actually i do know because this is the diet that humans have subsisted on for millions of years, our closest relatives thrive on this diet


Anyone who's read the published work in science books and peer-reviewd articles has come to the obvious conclusion that humans have been consuming flesh for eons. A fact that only vegetarians and other anti-meat eating activists seem to have a problem with. The only real controversey is whether we were true "hunters" or "scavengers."


Based on the fact that 75% of people are overweight, the number one killer is heart disease, life expectancy is falling and we have the laziest generation of human beings ever. These people all one thing in common, meat consumption



I seriously have no idea where you get your data from. This is complete rubish. I'll ask the question again. Why do traditional Inuit's seem to be immune to all of the diseases of civilization? It's an observation that can not be ignored.

People are overweight, yes, but do you have any idea what regulates fat accumulation? It's insulin, a hormone secreted upon carbohydrate consumption.

Laziness? How do you know that laziness isn't a side-effect of being fat? If all of your calories are being stored in the fat cells instead of being burned as fuel, don't you think your body will respond by burning less energy (slowing metabolism) and stimulating lethargy? That's exactly what happens.

Heart disease? According to clincal studies, it's more likely that CHD is caused by carbohydrates, specifically those that increase blood sugar and insulin. This hypothesis is supported by epidemiology, or observations. Carb consumption, through the effects of insulin, cause LDL to become small and dense. Carbs consumption also increases triglycerides and VLDL. Both of these are highly atherogenic and contribute greatly to plaque formation.



-Dev



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
I seriously have no idea where you get your data from. This is complete rubish. I'll ask the question again. Why do traditional Inuit's seem to be immune to all of the diseases of civilization? It's an observation that can not be ignored.


Rubish, you say. Then you continue to conjecture about a tribe of Inuit that doesn't have any dairy in their diet. The only observation that can be made, beside the one I pointed out to you, is that they don't eat dairy. They don't do fast food.

You ignore the science of Big Cats that was brought up and you complain others don't like science. It seems like it is you that doesn't like science.



I understand that industry support in scientific studies can negatively affect research integrity. But to simply dismiss all studies because of this small occurence is ludicrous.


Is this conjecture you made above a so-called industry support in the scientific studies of the Inuit people and their non-diary diet that would justify why their non-dairy diet supports reasons why diary diets are good for you? And, you suggest we should dimiss this study because you think it shouldn't be ignored.

Oh I get it, science takes one case of an athlete that was "well played," and science bans all natural resources based on it. Science takes all cases of diary eaters with all their health problems and decides an all meat diet is still good for you based on a small occurrence of a tribe of Inuit that don't eat diary.

That's not science.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by dzonatas

Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
I seriously have no idea where you get your data from. This is complete rubish. I'll ask the question again. Why do traditional Inuit's seem to be immune to all of the diseases of civilization? It's an observation that can not be ignored.


Rubish, you say. Then you continue to conjecture about a tribe of Inuit that doesn't have any dairy in their diet. The only observation that can be made, beside the one I pointed out to you, is that they don't eat dairy. They don't do fast food.

You ignore the science of Big Cats that was brought up and you complain others don't like science. It seems like it is you that doesn't like science.



I understand that industry support in scientific studies can negatively affect research integrity. But to simply dismiss all studies because of this small occurence is ludicrous.


Is this conjecture you made above a so-called industry support in the scientific studies of the Inuit people and their non-diary diet that would justify why their non-dairy diet supports reasons why diary diets are good for you? And, you suggest we should dimiss this study because you think it shouldn't be ignored.

Oh I get it, science takes one case of an athlete that was "well played," and science bans all natural resources based on it. Science takes all cases of diary eaters with all their health problems and decides an all meat diet is still good for you based on a small occurrence of a tribe of Inuit that don't eat diary.

That's not science.


You talk about science like it's an entity. It isn't. It's a method.

All 'natural resources' (I'll assume you meant supplements) are banned? That's just a silly. Total exaggeration.

And no, 'science' did not decide an all meat diet is good for you. The Inuits are just a curious phenomenon, and one which serves to refute this extremist nonsense about the evils of meat.

For a person who claims to be motivated by some kind of compassion, you sure do treat people with a lot of contempt.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   
I never said science as a whole was bull#, science is any systematic knowledge-base or prescriptive practice that is capable of resulting in a prediction or predictable type of outcome(definition). Anyone can be a scientist, I do scientific experiments all the time. I don't buy into the modern day scientific theories, studies and most conclusions.

@devolution the reason i disagree with your anecdotal evidence is because it is so ridiculous. Vegetarians don't weigh 300 pounds unless they eat blocks of cheese all day, or have a serious thyroid imbalance.

The inuits have the highest rate of suicide of basically any people, they don't sound too balanced to me.

www.phac-aspc.gc.ca...

I'm done with this thread at this point(hopefully
) at this point its just you and bogustruth trying to pick apart everything i say



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Rawhemp
 


First off, the suicide rates of modern Inuit have nothing to do with this thread, primarily because modern Inuit do not adhere to the diet of their ancestors(all meat).

Secondly, anyone who thinks they can maintain their health over an extended period living off of fruits and vegetables without supplementation from outside sources is fooling themselves. Why? You will get deficiencies, specifically in nutrients that can only be found and utilized following the consumption of meat. Dont believe me? Just google "prolonged vegetarian diet deficiency"(for meat haters"prolonged all meat diet deficiency". After reading a few of the results, you will realize that a vegetarian diet is not something that you should insist on following for the rest of your life if you truly want to be healthy, in doing so you will inherit a whole new host of problems. B12, yea, you can't get that in fruits/veg. However it can be gained through technological means which haven't been available for a VAST majority of human history(fermentation, yogurt, pills). I even found this on a VEGAN website www.vegsoc.org...

To backup my prior argument on the deficiencies gained from a prolonged vegetarian or fruit diet I will also say this. Many people are fooling themselves when it comes to a vegetable or fruit diet because they fail to realize the plethora of fruits and vegetables they see in stores to day haven't always been plentiful, edible, and available in quantities that can sustain what they would like to call a diet.

Before the dawn of farming/agriculture any fruits or vegetables that you have become fond of today would not only be scarce, they'd be inedible. You think those bananas or that broccoli you eat everyday has always tasted or even, heck, looked the way it does? Vegetables and fruits today taste, look, feel the way they do because they were bred for the specific traits we find ideal. Red, macintosh, sweet, granny smith, sour. A wild apple thousands of years ago would put you in a chemical coma, make you sick, stomach aches, you'd be puking it up. Overtime the fruits or vegetables we found that weren't as harmful to human body were bred with others that weren't as harmful, eventually we ended up with something that could be consumed on a regular basis with no ill effects. Also realize many of the vegetables and fruits we eat today can't be grown here(USA) or in certain regions, even if they could, it couldn't be done year round, hence, scarcity.

Now I'd be a fool to just ignore the healing that is apparently had by members of this thread once entering the vegan lifestyle, however, that argument is easily defeated. It appears most people think all their health problems were caused by meat(fat) and once switching to a vegan diet they were relieved of these ills. What most people fail the realize is they weren't healed because they dropped meat from their diet, they were healed because they dropped everything else that is associated with eating meat from their diet. Look at fast food for example, all these studies confirming people who eat fast food are disease ridden, fat, obese, they blame the meat. The point is, no one eats just meat, they eat the fries, bun, coke, ketchup. Of all the food in the crappy american diet, meat makes up the least of it. Many researchers fail to make this connection, which scares me to death. How could such a thing be overlooked?



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   
really?
how long does it take these deficiencies to show up?
becasue i havent feasted on a rotting corpse in years and i feel just fine.
is it supposed to take 5 years? 10 years? 15 years?
jsut how long do i need to go without meat to see these things show up?

and you guys are way off topic again arguing about scinetific methods, and observation this and that.
bottom line


ITS DEAD ROTTING ANIMALS
if that seems like yuor idea of health food, you have some serious issues that go far beyond dietary choices.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by WiseIsAwoken
.

Secondly, anyone who thinks they can maintain their health over an extended period living off of fruits and vegetables without supplementation from outside sources is fooling themselves. Why? You will get deficiencies, specifically in nutrients that can only be found and utilized following the consumption of meat. Dont believe me? Just google "prolonged vegetarian diet deficiency"(for meat haters"prolonged all meat diet deficiency". After reading a few of the results, you will realize that a vegetarian diet is not something that you should insist on following for the rest of your life if you truly want to be healthy, in doing so you will inherit a whole new host of problems. B12, yea, you can't get that in fruits/veg. However it can be gained through technological means which haven't been available for a VAST majority of human history(fermentation, yogurt, pills). I even found this on a VEGAN website www.vegsoc.org...


Your a fool if you think you can't sustain on only fruit and vegetables without deficiencies. Where do you think the cow gets its nutrients? What about all the other vegan animals? They must have deficiencies? Your just a fear mongering fool.

The b12 issue is a non issue, when your healthy your body recycles b12. Ontop of this b12 is abundant in bacterial sources, I don't wash my produce i receive directly from farmers which gives me adequate b12. If you eat fruits in any quantity you will eat bugs, these are a source of b12. The only vegans who might need to ever think about b12 supplementation are the junk food vegans.

Take your fear mongering bull somewhere else, I've done vast research on this diet and don't need some random person who probably eats a totally deficient telling me I'm gonna get deficiencies.

Show me proof of any essential vitamin, mineral or protien that is not available from plant sources. You can't.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by STFUPPERCUTTER
 


There is no specific time, however, they can and will happen, simply a matter of time.

And on the issue of rotting animal flesh, rotting would imply something that is decayed, foul odored, unpleasantly colored. My meat is anything but that and it appears you're going off on a tangent again. Whether meat is decayed or fresh, the point of the topic is to find out if its killing us, which no one in this thread has successfully shown.

Please, don't let your deep seated hatred towards meat eaters impede your ability to make relevant post.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Rawhemp
 


Vegan animals? Cows? Ruminant animals? Seriously? Have you done any research at all? Cows and other vegan animals have multiple guts which allow them to absorb the products(B12) of fermentation leftover by the bacteria living in the innards. Humans can do the same, to an extent(one stomach), not enough to completely rely on it instead of adequate nutrition.

It is also true that we recycle b12, but when you aren't getting enough in your diet to make a up for the lost when it is recycled, a deficiency is to eventually occur. Trace amounts of b12 are indeed found on the surface of fruit/veg and in dirt, but the amounts too miniscule to rely on. The thing I've discovered about b12 deficiency is that most people live with it for years, its not always immediately noticeable. However, when it hits, the damage sustained is usually permanent. Fortunately, most of the problems associated with it are easily cured by supplementation. For proof of my claims, all one has to do is google "vegan b12 deficiency, the truth is there.

Again, all I'm saying is it is not wise to rely solely on fruits/veggies for your diet. There is no fear mongering here, I'm just speaking facts. It has happened plenty of times, without external supplementation to your diet(unnatural sources) you WILL develop deficiencies. This is not my opinion, this is not fear mongering, this is FACT.

[edit on 12/4/2009 by WiseIsAwoken]

[edit on 12/4/2009 by WiseIsAwoken]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by WiseIsAwokenThis is not my opinion, this is not fear mongering, this is FACT.


It is a FACT that we have discussed the subject of your opinion already in this thread. No need for a circular argument being made.

---

As for how TT continues to twist my words, meh.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by WiseIsAwoken


Again, all I'm saying is it is not wise to rely solely on fruits/veggies for your diet. There is no fear mongering here

]


Its probably the wisest thing you could do, all i hear from you is fear monger this, fear monger that. The b12 has been brought up time and time again, what you meat eaters always neglect to mention is that people on a standard american diet have higher instances of b12 deficiency then vegans.

Thought this article was interesting for you guys touting the longer life theory,

scientists have long believed that an ultra low calorie diet - aproximately 60 per cent of normal levels - can lead to greater longevity. But now a team of British researchers have discovered that the key to the effect is a reduction in a specific protein and not the total number of calories.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

According to this study the key may be lower levels of menthionine, a amino acid prominent in fish, meat and eggs. Now this study is by no means conclusive but its very interesting none the less

[edit on 4-12-2009 by Rawhemp]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by dzonatas

Rubish, you say. Then you continue to conjecture about a tribe of Inuit that doesn't have any dairy in their diet. The only observation that can be made, beside the one I pointed out to you, is that they don't eat dairy. They don't do fast food.


The prewesternized inuit were brought up because of their diet that consists of 90% meat and the observation that they don't experience diseases of civilization. My point was: If meat is causing these diseases, why do prewesternized inuit seem immune to them? Why are you bringing up fast food and dairy?


You ignore the science of Big Cats that was brought up and you complain others don't like science. It seems like it is you that doesn't like science.


What? Your bias is really affecting your judgement. Not only did I not ignore the "science" of big cats but I addressed the issue, presented a rebuttal and provided the evidence to support my stance. That would be the OPPOSITE of ignoring.

Jesus christ, what the hell are you reading? Your support for your friend is getting the best of you. Read and post objectively and you'll provide something worth reading.....



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rawhemp
I don't buy into the modern day scientific theories, studies and most conclusions.


Not because they're poorly constructed....or because of any logical reason. But because you're so sure your dogmatic beliefs are true that you won't accept anything that even remotely suggests otherwise. What's sad is, you've been ready and willing to accept any study that fits with your ideology.


@devolution the reason i disagree with your anecdotal evidence is because it is so ridiculous.


Like I said, you'll dismiss my experiences.....hypocritical, no?


Vegetarians don't weigh 300 pounds unless they eat blocks of cheese all day


This is completely false. Dietary fat does not get "dumped" into fat cells. It's regulated by Insulin, a hormone secreted upon carbohydrate consumption. Please learn how fat is metabolized and regulated.


or have a serious thyroid imbalance.


I'll give you another lesson in metabolism regulation. As thyroid hormone falls, metabolism subsequently does the same. What's almost always forgotten is WHY thyroid hormone production slows down. In most cases, it's the absence of fuel, or food.

Fat people are told to restrict calories to lose weight. Once caloric expenditure is more than intake the body produces less thyroid hormone and metabolic rate falls. Hunger increases and, inevitably, nature wins over dieting.

So, what makes them fat? Insulin. Insulin will keep fat stored in adipocytes and will not release them for energy. The cells begin to starve and hunger sets in. The presence of insulin will slow the metabolism because it actually starves the cells.

In other words, obese aren't fat because of their thyroid imbalance; thyroid problems, on the contrary, are caused by being insulin and increased fat storage.

There are, however, some cases of thyroid problems not being caused by the above description. But this is typically not the case.

Every bit of that is found in textbooks and research dating back to the beginning of the 20th century.

-Dev



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
If meat is causing these diseases, why do prewesternized inuit seem immune to them? Why are you bringing up fast food and dairy?


You seem to consider all meat the same. Even if 0.1% of the people on Earth eat meat and can can be healthy, how is that suppose to scientifically prove that everybody in the rest of the world can eat any meat they want and be healthy?

I'll ask this in a different way: how are the prewesternized Inuit people on-topic to this thread except for the fact they don't have any dairy in their diet?



From McDonald's FAQ:
6. How many customers does McDonald's serve every day around the world?
Every day McDonald's serves more than 47 million customers around the world.


Even when you compare the population of the Inuit to just the customers per day of McD's, the Inuit only make up 1.5% of that portion of meat eaters. That's probably the highest percentage you can find. I'm sure the real figure is less when you add in customers of other fast foods, supermarkets, and other food outlets that produce meat.

You rant shouldn't be against vegetarians. Your rant should be at all meat eaters that don't eat the same exact diet as the Inuit. That would be about 98% of the population of meat eaters based on the sample presented above.

It's diary versus non-dairy, not meat eaters vs vegetarians.

"Eating 'diary' is making us sick..." is very much on-topic.


Not only did I not ignore the "science" of big cats but I addressed the issue, presented a rebuttal and provided the evidence to support my stance. That would be the OPPOSITE of ignoring.


Did you read my rebuttal about sunlight and how both Big Cats and the Inuit have the same exact trait to eat meat for certain vitamins. Science wouldn't ignore this commonality like you have. To ignore Big Cats and not the Inuit is evidence of your bias and lack of being objective.



Jesus christ, what the hell are you reading? Your support for your friend is getting the best of you. Read and post objectively and you'll provide something worth reading.....


I object to your ad hominem.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 05:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by dzonatas

Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
If meat is causing these diseases, why do prewesternized inuit seem immune to them? Why are you bringing up fast food and dairy?


You seem to consider all meat the same. Even if 0.1% of the people on Earth eat meat and can can be healthy, how is that suppose to scientifically prove that everybody in the rest of the world can eat any meat they want and be healthy?


The Inuit are not the only people that can survive healthily on meat. They are, however, an extreme case that simply creates a paradox that can not be ignored.


I'll ask this in a different way: how are the prewesternized Inuit people on-topic to this thread except for the fact they don't have any dairy in their diet?


Three reasons: 1) The thread title is "meat is making us sick" and, 2) I was responding to a post from another member regarding meat consumption. 3) The topic of discussion from the very frist page of this thread has been slightly off-topic, which is to be expected when starting a thread focusing on such a sensative topic.

In fact, Rawhemp was the first to reply to the OP and he had this to say:


Over eating of protein is the main cause for just about every disease and sickness out there today.


This comment, along with other member's comments in response, paved the foundation and direction of the discussion.



From McDonald's FAQ:
6. How many customers does McDonald's serve every day around the world?
Every day McDonald's serves more than 47 million customers around the world.


Even when you compare the population of the Inuit to just the customers per day of McD's, the Inuit only make up 1.5% of that portion of meat eaters. That's probably the highest percentage you can find. I'm sure the real figure is less when you add in customers of other fast foods, supermarkets, and other food outlets that produce meat.

But, what you're completely disregarding is the fact that we're speaking of prewesternized inuits. There are many observations that mimic those made by Steffenson, who popularized the observation that they did indeed eat an almost all meat diet. In fact, Steffenson himself ate the diet for one whole year while being monitored by doctors to review his health. At the end of the year, he was in prime physical and mental health.

Oh.....and do you realize that out of all of those 47million customers there is probably 10 of them that order only meat when they drive thru? The fact that the inuits didn't consumed animal products almost exclusively sets them apart from the 47 million mcdonalds eaters that sucked down a coke and gobbled a bucket of fries.


You rant shouldn't be against vegetarians. Your rant should be at all meat eaters that don't eat the same exact diet as the Inuit. That would be about 98% of the population of meat eaters based on the sample presented above.


I don't rant to against vegetarians. I have a problem with vegetarians/vegans/raw foodies claiming that meat is unhealthy. I have a problem with vegans/veges/raw foodies talking with a holier than thou attitude and attacking me for my dietary choice.


It's diary versus non-dairy, not meat eaters vs vegetarians.


Could've fooled me. Go back and read the thread and try again. In any case, I'm responding to the off-topic meat haters and denying ignorance.


"Eating 'diary' is making us sick..." is very much on-topic.[/'quote]

Congrats. It's also a very broad statement that can have many meanings. But, I'm assuming you're just making a point.


Did you read my rebuttal about sunlight and how both Big Cats and the Inuit have the same exact trait to eat meat for certain vitamins. Science wouldn't ignore this commonality like you have. To ignore Big Cats and not the Inuit is evidence of your bias and lack of being objective.


I wrote a response and lost it, then forgot to rewrite it. So, I'll have it shortly.

-Dev



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join