Vegan / Vegetarians Only (Chat about lifestyle, opportunities, food, whatever...)

[MJ DeMarco]

Not sure if this is true, but it really doesn't matter because it's all about the perspective of the oppressed and murdered. This story kinda reflects "my moment" that changed my perspective, except I wasn't spearing a bull, I was eating a chicken sandwich.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Jon822]

I was an avid keto cultist until a vegan YouTuber provided a link to the data. I just couldn't argue with it and that's what set the ball in motion. If animals products are unhealthy for us, then why are we making them suffer? It's a lose-lose situation, and if you include the environmental impact, it's a lose-lose-lose situation.

 

[MJ DeMarco]

I was an avid keto cultist

I was an avid paleo cultist which by today's standards would be classified as a carnivore diet— I'll go on record and say that shit almost killed me.

 

[Jon822]

I was an avid paleo cultist which by today's standards would be classified as a carnivore diet— I'll go on record and say that shit almost killed me.

The irony is that plant-based is closer to what paleo is supposed to be. I'm glad you had the opportunity to save yourself from one of the most unhealthy diets there is.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Dome]

I also thought the experiment immediately lost validity when they stopped micromanaging and providing the diets to the subjects. As soon as they let the subjects loose in the wild, to fend for themselves with their promises of sticking to the particular diet, any results became moot in my eyes.

If you want to run a controlled experiment, the diet needs to be controlled for the full 8 weeks, not 4, and well, go take care of it yourself.

You could tell that these people could not be trusted to stick to any diet, so after 4 weeks, the rest became null-and-void to me. In other words, none of these people on the vegan diet were going to go buy some lentils on their own outside of the 4 week window. A package of Oreos? Sure. Lentils, quinoa, or beans? Hell No.

When they shared the final results you could even see (on the powerpoint in the background) that the ldl cholesterin of the vegans had fallen the first 4 weeks and than raises again after the 4th week, week for week. I'm not an expert but I think that this clearly shows that after the week 4 the vegan group wasn't that vegan anymore.

 

[MJ DeMarco]

I'm not an expert but I think that this clearly shows that after the week 4 the vegan group wasn't that vegan anymore.

Yup. The subjects telegraphed early on that they couldn't be trusted to stick to any diet, they were going to be ruled by flavor and taste, not nutrition and longevity. After 4 weeks, the study became worthless.

 

[Jon822]

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[mikecarlooch]

Hello vegan community.

I'd like to start by saying I am not vegan and never would be. I don't believe in extremes (vegan/carnivore) but rather variety.. More of a paleolithic life.

I always love hearing viewpoints though and I wanted to know the opinion those of you guys who are plant-based have on this excerpt from a book I was reading, Antifragile by Nassim Taleb:

"Hormesis was well known by the ancients (and like the color blue was known but not expressed). But it was only in 1888 that it was first "scientifically" described (though still not given a name) by a German toxicologist , Hugo Schulz, who observed that small doses of poison stimulate the growth of yeast while larger doses cause harm. Some researchers hold that the benefits of vegetables may not be so much in what we call the "vitamins" or some other rationalizing theories (that is, ideas that seem to make sense in narrative form but have not been subjected to rigorous empirical testing), but in the following: plants protect themselves from harm and fend off predators with poisonous substances that, ingested by us in the right quantities, may stimulate our organisms - or so goes the story. Again, limited low-dose poisoning triggers healthy benefits"

 

[MJ DeMarco]

Hello vegan community.

I'd like to start by saying I am not vegan and never would be. I don't believe in extremes (vegan/carnivore) but rather variety.. More of a paleolithic life.

I always love hearing viewpoints though and I wanted to know the opinion those of you guys who are plant-based have on this excerpt from a book I was reading, Antifragile by Nassim Taleb:

"Hormesis was well known by the ancients (and like the color blue was known but not expressed). But it was only in 1888 that it was first "scientifically" described (though still not given a name) by a German toxicologist , Hugo Schulz, who observed that small doses of poison stimulate the growth of yeast while larger doses cause harm. Some researchers hold that the benefits of vegetables may not be so much in what we call the "vitamins" or some other rationalizing theories (that is, ideas that seem to make sense in narrative form but have not been subjected to rigorous empirical testing), but in the following: plants protect themselves from harm and fend off predators with poisonous substances that, ingested by us in the right quantities, may stimulate our organisms - or so goes the story. Again, limited low-dose poisoning triggers healthy benefits"

I don't listen to mathematicians for health advice.

I listen to guys like this who have PhD's and zero bias...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wD8reCw3Kls

(If you want to truly be educated on the benefits of plant-based eating, why not listen to someone who actually has scientific experience in it? Spend 10 hours in that channel and you'll learn more than Taleb will ever teach you about health. And BTW, this doctor was not vegetarian (or vegan) up until recently.)

... Sinclair studied longevity for 25+ years at Harvard and MIT with a real education, not some YT rando... Guys like this who makes decisions based on rigorous studies and actual peer reviewed data... as he says, when determining the data on various diets for health and longevity, "the data is the data" and a plant-based diet is best for longevity.

So I don't care what Mr. Taleb thinks, or speculates.

I've conducted my own diligence which what amounts to about arround 400+ hours of research, not to mention my own blood bio-markers.

The YT channel I cited explains that body stresses are good for longevity (such as cold showers, heat exposure, fasting, etc.) So your theory that plants expose us to mild-toxins that strengthen the body makes some sort of intuitive sense that body stressors can be good.

I don't believe in extremes (vegan/carnivore) but rather variety..

Yes, it's hard to convince a twenty-something that this stuff matters when their body can withstand the onslaught of the standard American diet (SAD), at least until they hit their 30s.

However, I hope when you reach my age, you change your limiting belief that eating plant-based is extreme. I find the mass production and slaughtering of animals "extreme". I find having disease, aches, and pains that start at age 35 and continue until you die (the current expectation of culture) is extreme.

Culture, religion, and tradition are the ultimate brain-washers as it wires in a SCRIPT, defaulting to standard orthodoxies for thinking, to the point that no thinking is done, and anything "outside the box" is dismissed reflexively. Gee, maybe I should write a book called UNSCRIPTED ? Lol.

 

[mikecarlooch]

Yes, it's hard to convince a twenty-something that this stuff matters when their body can withstand the onslaught of the standard American diet (SAD), at least until they hit their 30s.

However, I hope when you reach my age, you change your limiting belief that eating plant-based is extreme. I find the mass production and slaughtering of animals "extreme".

Culture, religion, and tradition are the ultimate brain-washers, as it defaults to standard orthodoxies for thinking, to the point that no thinking is done, and anything "outside the box" is dismissed reflexively.

I actually happen to be on both ends of the spectrum because I’ve tried both, carnivore / vegan .. i felt much better on one of them (I won’t reveal)

It’s honestly just hard to take a stance on extremes because for every scientific source advocating plants, there’s another scientific source advocating meat

For every study there seems to be on tearing down plants, there’s another tearing down meat. The reverse is also true.

Google the health benefits of plants.. it’ll tell you

Google the health benefits of meat.. it’ll tell you

There’s studies like these : WHAT DOESN’T KILL YOU….

That make Taleb’s theories appear truthful, and I’m sure that there are some that discredit it as well.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[MJ DeMarco]

I actually happen to be on both ends of the spectrum because I’ve tried both, carnivore / vegan .. i felt much better on one of them (I won’t reveal)

It’s honestly just hard to take a stance on extremes because for every scientific source advocating plants, there’s another scientific source advocating meat

For every study there seems to be on tearing down plants, there’s another tearing down meat. The reverse is also true.

Google the health benefits of plants.. it’ll tell you

Google the health benefits of meat.. it’ll tell you

There’s studies like these : WHAT DOESN’T KILL YOU….

That make Taleb’s theories appear truthful, and I’m sure that there are some that discredit it as well.

Again Mike, you're in your 20s.

Look me up when you’re 55 after 35 years of your "preferred diet" has had a chance to methodically kill you.

Sorry but meat and dairy will never be good for you unless consumed in tiny amounts (not moderation, tiny) -- and sorry, this thread was not created to share your antithetical viewpoint. And I don't care what "studies" are out there -- I can find studies that show cyanide and anti-freeze are good for you when funded by the right sponsors.

Sorry, but this isn't a thread to debate your preferred diet, or why we believe why we believe it. The truth is not easy to defend when 99% of the world thinks you're "extreme" -- kinda like when "they" burned or hung non-believers, or anyone who questioned "God" during the inquisition.

 

[mikecarlooch]

And I don't care what "studies" are out there -- I can find studies that show cyanide and anti-freeze are good for you when funded by the right sponsors.

Right, so we agree (in different contexts)

 

[Jon822]

Plant-based is scientifically proven to be the only healthy way to eat for longevity. There is no point in debating it.

Regarding your "plants contain some small traces of poison" - yes, they do. And they are completely removed by the process of cooking.

This is not a case of "I can find whatever I want on Google so, therefore, we can't really know anything." It's very easy to debunk bogus studies that were biased from the start - like an egg company "proving" that dietary cholesterol does not increase serum cholesterol. Newsflash - it does. But it does so logarithmically, meaning that there are diminishing returns. So egg companies will intentionally grab participants who have such high levels of starting cholesterol that eating eggs barely moves their serum cholesterol (because they are near the upper limit of the logarithm spectrum). They then falsely conclude that "there is no statistical significance to egg consumption increasing serum cholesterol."

Like most bullshit, it's technically true but the details are what matter and are intentionally left out. If you take someone who has healthy levels of serum cholesterol, consuming a single egg will produce a significant spike in serum cholesterol.

A twenty-something year old claiming "I feel better on a carnivore diet." is analogous to a twenty-something year old claiming "I've smoked cigarettes since I was 10 and still don't have lung cancer."

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[mikecarlooch]

Plant-based is scientifically proven to be the only healthy way to eat for longevity. There is no point in debating it.

Regarding your "plants contain some small traces of poison" - yes, they do. And they are completely removed by the process of cooking.

This is not a case of "I can find whatever I want on Google so, therefore, we can't really know anything." It's very easy to debunk bogus studies that were biased from the start - like an egg company "proving" that dietary cholesterol does not increase serum cholesterol. Newsflash - it does. But it does so logarithmically, meaning that there are diminishing returns. So egg companies will intentionally grab participants who have such high levels of starting cholesterol that eating eggs barely moves (because they are near the upper limit of the logarithm spectrum). They then falsely conclude that "there is no statistical significance to egg consumption increasing serum cholesterol."

Like most bullshit, it's technically true but the details are what matter and are intentionally left out. If you take someone who has healthy levels of serum cholesterol, consuming a single egg will produce a significant spike in serum cholesterol.

A twenty-something year old claiming "I feel better on a carnivore diet." is analogous to a twenty-something year old claiming "I've smoked cigarettes since I was 10 and still don't have lung cancer."

Since I asked for opinions, I won’t respond with any claims. Thanks for response

 

[mikecarlooch]

Plant-based is scientifically proven to be the only healthy way to eat for longevity. There is no point in debating it.

Regarding your "plants contain some small traces of poison" - yes, they do. And they are completely removed by the process of cooking.

This is not a case of "I can find whatever I want on Google so, therefore, we can't really know anything." It's very easy to debunk bogus studies that were biased from the start - like an egg company "proving" that dietary cholesterol does not increase serum cholesterol. Newsflash - it does. But it does so logarithmically, meaning that there are diminishing returns. So egg companies will intentionally grab participants who have such high levels of starting cholesterol that eating eggs barely moves their serum cholesterol (because they are near the upper limit of the logarithm spectrum). They then falsely conclude that "there is no statistical significance to egg consumption increasing serum cholesterol."

Like most bullshit, it's technically true but the details are what matter and are intentionally left out. If you take someone who has healthy levels of serum cholesterol, consuming a single egg will produce a significant spike in serum cholesterol.

A twenty-something year old claiming "I feel better on a carnivore diet." is analogous to a twenty-something year old claiming "I've smoked cigarettes since I was 10 and still don't have lung cancer."

My one question though, out of genuine curiosity - should organizations like the Weston A Price foundation and PhD’s who don’t share the same viewpoint be completely written off like dust in the wind?

(I ask because I’m trying to learn and understand)

 

[Jon822]

My one question though, out of genuine curiosity - should organizations like the Weston A Price foundation and PhD’s who don’t share the same viewpoint be completely written off like dust in the wind?

(I ask because I’m trying to learn and understand)

Degrees don't matter. You can have a PhD in mathematics and if you think 2+2=5 you're wrong. Appealing to authority is a logical fallacy for a good reason.

An argument is either valid on its own or it is incorrect. If it needs PhD's to prop it up, then a gentle breeze will quickly reveal its flaws.

I've been where you are. I've done and am very familiar with every popular diet. I have a degree in mathematics and statistics but I've read more pages of nutrition and fitness material than math by a factor of 10 simply because this information has more relevance to my health and life.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[mikecarlooch]

Degrees don't matter. You can have a PhD in mathematics and if you think 2+2=5 you're wrong. Appealing to authority is a logical fallacy for a good reason.

An argument is either valid on its own or it is incorrect. If it needs PhD's to prop it up, then a gentle breeze will quickly reveal its flaws.

I've been where you are. I've done and am very familiar with every popular diet. I have a degree in mathematics and statistics but I've read more pages of nutrition and fitness material than math by a factor of 10 simply because this information has more relevance to my health and life.

I mean I would say MJ is a pretty educated person on the side of plant based eating - and he said this in the message above

“I listen to guys like this who have PhD's and zero bias...”

If we don’t listen to PhD’s, who do we listen to?

 

[Jon822]

I mean I would say MJ is a pretty educated person on the side of plant based eating - and he said this in the message above

“I listen to guys like this who have PhD's and zero bias...”

If we don’t listen to PhD’s, who do we listen to?

The point is that PhD's do not prove anything by themselves. You have to evaluate the person's credibility and bias using objective tripwires. For example, would you trust anything my hypothetical mathematics PhD holder has to say when you know he thinks that 2+2=5? Of course not.

In any subject, there are foundational theories that have been conclusively proven that can serve as tripwires. Would you trust a biology PhD holder who thinks evolution hasn't occurred? Would you trust a PhD physicist who thinks gravity doesn't exist?

In nutrition, the foundational, indisputable proof that has existed for decades now is that saturated fat and cholesterol are the ONLY significant contributors to heart disease and all diseases that are caused by arterial blockages. If a PhD holder recommends any food or drink that contains high levels of saturated fat or any cholesterol, they are the equivalent to any of the above examples I mentioned.

Even in the exact quote you gave from MJ, he said that he trusts people who have "PhD's and zero bias." A PhD holder is more likely (correlative) to know about a given topic than the average person but it is not absolute (causal).

 

[mikecarlooch]

The point is that PhD's do not prove anything by themselves. You have to evaluate the person's credibility and bias using objective tripwires. For example, would you trust anything my hypothetical mathematics PhD holder has to say when you know he thinks that 2+2=5? Of course not.

In any subject, there are foundational theories that have been conclusively proven that can serve as tripwires. Would you trust a biology PhD holder who thinks evolution hasn't occurred? Would you trust a PhD physicist who thinks gravity doesn't exist?

In nutrition, the foundational, indisputable proof that has existed for decades now is that saturated fat and cholesterol are the ONLY significant contributors to heart disease and all diseases that are caused by arterial blockages. If a PhD holder recommends any food or drink that contains high levels of saturated fat or any cholesterol, they are the equivalent to any of the above examples I mentioned.

Even in the exact quote you gave from MJ, he said that he trusts people who have "PhD's and zero bias." A PhD holder is more likely (correlative) to know about a given topic than the average person but it is not absolute (causal).

The thing that stops me from moving from either end of the spectrum is the following:

I think Dr David Sinclair is right.. to an extent.

Because I also think Paul Saladino is right.. to an extent.

I'm just suspicious that if this was a thread about carnivore diets, it would be someone saying the exact same thing you're saying here, just talking the other way around with a different conviction.

Get what i mean?

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Jon822]

The thing that stops me from moving from either end of the spectrum is the following:

I think Dr David Sinclair is right.. to an extent.

Because I also think Paul Saladino is right.. to an extent.

I'm just suspicious that if this was a thread about carnivore diets, it would be someone saying the exact same thing you're saying here, just talking the other way around with a different conviction.

Get what i mean?

I understand what you're saying but the difference is that carnivores have no long term, scientifically valid studies they can point to to prove anything they say. It's all emotional nonsense or anecdotes like "I feel better on the carnivore diet."

What you just said would be the equivalent to saying that If I go to a flat-earth forum, they would all say the same thing and have the same "evidence". They don't and they just don't understand why they don't. It's the same thing here.

Like I said, I'm very familiar with keto, the carnivore diet, and many others. Nothing you've said is anything new.

 

[mikecarlooch]

I understand what you're saying but the difference is that carnivores have no long term, scientifically valid studies they can point to to prove anything they say. It's all emotional nonsense or anecdotes like "I feel better on the carnivore diet."

What you just said would be the equivalent to saying that If I go to a flat-earth forum, they would all say the same thing and have the same "evidence". They don't and they just don't understand why they don't. It's the same thing here.

Like I said, I'm very familiar with keto, the carnivore diet, and many others. Nothing you've said is anything new.

I agree that strict carnivore is not very good, there's no doubt about it (however many would disagree, e.g dr ken berry)

But, on the other end of the extreme, how do you know for sure you are not the flat earther?

I could argue and say that meat has been eaten by humans for 2 million years, and vegetables, barely a fraction of that. But that doesn't mean vegetables are bad, or that meat is bad. Just that they're both part of a natural human diet, just like how a lion has the urge to eat a deer.

 

[MJ DeMarco]

I'm just suspicious that if this was a thread about carnivore diets, it would be someone saying the exact same thing you're saying here, just talking the other way around with a different conviction.

And why is it that we aren't espousing our opinions in that carnivore thread here at the forum?

If I popped in there every time I found evidence that their diet was stupid, I'd be bumping that thread weekly.

But I don't bother.

And I'll tell you why and Jon alluded to it: I don't bother going to a flat-earth forum to tell those folks about round earth. I don't go to the communism sub-Reddit and speak about capitalism.

I've done my research. I looked at the studies, I've examined my own blood work and bio-markers (not, "gee I feel better!").

But Mylie Cyrus was vEGan for 6 moNtThs aNd beCaMe eMaciaTEDd and malNOurisHed dRinKing only CeleRy wAteR! Gee, ya think?

Anyway, as a man in my 50s, I find this funny....




What is normal today will, one day, be laughed at 30 years from now.

The normal idea that a diet in meat and dairy ("the carnivore diet") is even remotely healthy is one of these ridiculous ideas that will be subject to ridicule in the distant future—even in moderation, like smoking cigarettes in moderation is OK.

The carnivore diet is to longevity as Dropshipping and MLM is to Fastlane.

I find it terribly sad that the most victims of this ridiculousness are young people like yourself.

Thing is, these types of ideas (and beliefs) will DIE with their holders as they hit their 50s, 60s, 70s, and beyond, if they even make it that far. Time will reveal the truth through aches, pains, and disease, or worse— death.

The only thing slowing down this truth that plants extend life and meat/dairy does not, is the indirect association to the World Economic Forum, the meat/dairy/sugar lobby and the climate agenda which naturally makes people like me, suspicious.

I've been able to separate the agenda from the facts, but only after sorting through a lot of BS by conflicted interests, and people with programs and diet plans to sell.

Right, so we agree (in different contexts)

I didn't go vegan 6 years ago because I read some studies, if that's what you're inferring.

But the studies that have accumulated over that time certainly validate I made the right decision, if not my personal results, biochemistry, and disappearance of every ailment I had in my 30's, caused by the well-touted, well-studied, influencer-backed "paleolithic" diet— the diet you espouse which BTW, helped me pack on muscle, but by the time I was in my late-thirties, I was well onto a path of disease and a life filled with pharma medications.

BTW, if I happen to die anytime soon, it won't be because of my plant-based diet, it will be because of the horrific diet I followed in my 30s and early 40s which wreaked havoc on my body.

“I listen to guys like this who have PhD's and zero bias...”

The guy with a PhD provided pretty substantive evidence from sources not funded by the Dairy Council or Cattleman's Beef Association, if you can cut through a lot of the scientific minutiae.

An example of a "trip wire" that Jon mentions is a PhD researcher who loves steak, has no interest in plant-based diets, but ultimately comes to that conclusion after X,XXX studies reveal it to be so, including his own.

It's funny — I've watched Sinclair in the video on a variety of podcasts and he always has to dance around the topic of diet because he knows as soon as he says "eat mostly plants" the audience will get triggered—on par with saying "vote Democrat" or "vote Republican" — He knows humans are dogmatic in matters of religion, politics, and diet, damn the data or the longevity studies of people in their 80s, 90s, 100s.

I could argue and say that meat has been eaten by humans for 2 million years, and vegetables, barely a fraction of that. But that doesn't mean vegetables are bad, or that meat is bad. Just that they're both part of a natural human diet, just like how a lion has the urge to eat a deer.

Please Mike, don't make me remove you from the thread. I didn't create this thread for your debate, or to convince you.

EAT WHAT YOU WANT.

And live with it.

Again, you don't see us in the carnivore thread debating their diet, do you?

But yet, here you are....

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[mikecarlooch]

Please Mike, don't make me remove you from the thread. I didn't create this thread for your debate, or to convince you.

EAT WHAT YOU WANT.

And live with it.

Again, you don't see us in the carnivore thread debating their diet, do you?

But yet, here you are....

Sorry I admittedly get caught up in this stuff anytime someone brings it up, I get a kick out of debating it.

I'll stop, certainly didn't mean any disrespect to anyone just turned into friendly debate.

 

[mikecarlooch]

And why is it that we aren't espousing our opinions in that carnivore thread here at the forum?

If I popped in there every time I found evidence that their diet was stupid, I'd be bumping that thread weekly.

But I don't bother.

And I'll tell you why and Jon alluded to it: I don't bother going to a flat-earth forum to tell those folks about round earth. I don't go to the communism sub-Reddit and speak about capitalism.

I've done my research. I looked at the studies, I've examined my own blood work and bio-markers (not, "gee I feel better!").

But Mylie Cyrus was vEGan for 6 moNtThs aNd beCaMe eMaciaTEDd and malNOurisHed dRinKing only CeleRy wAteR! Gee, ya think?

Anyway, as a man in my 50s, I find this funny....


View attachment 54058

What is normal today will, one day, be laughed at 30 years from now.

The normal idea that a diet in meat and dairy ("the carnivore diet") is even remotely healthy is one of these ridiculous ideas that will be subject to ridicule in the distant future—even in moderation, like smoking cigarettes in moderation is OK.

The carnivore diet is to longevity as Dropshipping and MLM is to Fastlane.

I find it terribly sad that the most victims of this ridiculousness are young people like yourself.

Thing is, these types of ideas (and beliefs) will DIE with their holders as they hit their 50s, 60s, 70s, and beyond, if they even make it that far. Time will reveal the truth through aches, pains, and disease, or worse— death.

The only thing slowing down this truth that plants extend life and meat/dairy does not, is the indirect association to the World Economic Forum, the meat/dairy/sugar lobby and the climate agenda which naturally makes people like me, suspicious.

I've been able to separate the agenda from the facts, but only after sorting through a lot of BS by conflicted interests, and people with programs and diet plans to sell.



I didn't go vegan 6 years ago because I read some studies, if that's what you're inferring.

But the studies that have accumulated over that time certainly validate I made the right decision, if not my personal results, biochemistry, and disappearance of every ailment I had in my 30's, caused by the well-touted, well-studied, influencer-backed "paleolithic" diet— the diet you espouse which BTW, helped me pack on muscle, but by the time I was in my late-thirties, I was well onto a path of disease and a life filled with pharma medications.

BTW, if I happen to die anytime soon, it won't be because of my plant-based diet, it will be because of the horrific diet I followed in my 30s and early 40s which wreaked havoc on my body.



The guy with a PhD provided pretty substantive evidence from sources not funded by the Dairy Council or Cattleman's Beef Association, if you can cut through a lot of the scientific minutiae.

An example of a "trip wire" that Jon mentions is a PhD researcher who loves steak, has no interest in plant-based diets, but ultimately comes to that conclusion after X,XXX studies reveal it to be so, including his own.

It's funny — I've watched Sinclair in the video on a variety of podcasts and he always has to dance around the topic of diet because he knows as soon as he says "eat mostly plants" the audience will get triggered—on par with saying "vote Democrat" or "vote Republican" — He knows humans are dogmatic in matters of religion, politics, and diet, damn the data or the longevity studies of people in their 80s, 90s, 100s.



Please Mike, don't make me remove you from the thread. I didn't create this thread for your debate, or to convince you.

EAT WHAT YOU WANT.

And live with it.

Again, you don't see us in the carnivore thread debating their diet, do you?

But yet, here you are....

And I actually think you make some great points by the way - notably the carnivore diet being a fad.

Moving away from debate, what was the diet that you followed in your 30s/40s that you said led to bad health?

 

[Devilery]

Hello vegan community.

I'd like to start by saying I am not vegan and never would be. I don't believe in extremes (vegan/carnivore) but rather variety.. More of a paleolithic life.

I always love hearing viewpoints though and I wanted to know the opinion those of you guys who are plant-based have on this excerpt from a book I was reading, Antifragile by Nassim Taleb:

"Hormesis was well known by the ancients (and like the color blue was known but not expressed). But it was only in 1888 that it was first "scientifically" described (though still not given a name) by a German toxicologist , Hugo Schulz, who observed that small doses of poison stimulate the growth of yeast while larger doses cause harm. Some researchers hold that the benefits of vegetables may not be so much in what we call the "vitamins" or some other rationalizing theories (that is, ideas that seem to make sense in narrative form but have not been subjected to rigorous empirical testing), but in the following: plants protect themselves from harm and fend off predators with poisonous substances that, ingested by us in the right quantities, may stimulate our organisms - or so goes the story. Again, limited low-dose poisoning triggers healthy benefits"

I don't want to go into a long discussion about it but what's your point? Of course, plants have protective features - sour taste, spikes, poison, horrible smell, density, etc.

But don't animals have those too, and wouldn't you say it's more obvious to eat non-poisonous, good-tasting plants that are generally good for your health over animals that will kick, scream, bite, and do everything possible to kill you to avoid being killed?

"Should we eat bananas? I hear too much potassium could lead to heart issues. How about we rather murder this fully conscious animal with a superior modern weapon, so it doesn't kill us first out of protecting itself?"

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Dome]

O

I agree that strict carnivore is not very good, there's no doubt about it (however many would disagree, e.g dr ken berry)

But, on the other end of the extreme, how do you know for sure you are not the flat earther?

I could argue and say that meat has been eaten by humans for 2 million years, and vegetables, barely a fraction of that. But that doesn't mean vegetables are bad, or that meat is bad. Just that they're both part of a natural human diet, just like how a lion has the urge to eat a deer.

Googled Dr Ken Berry and it took me 2 seconds to see he ist just a guru/marketer. He gathers sheeps around him, builds a echo chamber, creates an enemy (vegans) and than finally take his sheeps to the slaugerh.. ahh sorry, salesfunnel - community subscriptions, affiliate links and other stuff. He has created a persona that you like or hate. Provocative communication. His sales page looks really simple and ugly. And this speaks a lot about the target group he wants to sell to.

If it looks like a guru, walks like a guru and sells like a guru, then it just may be a guru​

and not a scientist you should relate to.

 

[AmazingLarry]

Hey guys, I'm looking at switching over to a plan-based diet (probably vegetarian) and I'm putting together a meal plan. I asked GPT for help, but wanted to get some input on what you all eat on a daily basis.

I'm trying to meet the following criteria:

• 3000 calories
• 200g protein/day
• 35g or less of saturated fat/day
• 25 or less added sugar/day
• Minimally processed foods

I also want to get at least 45g of fiber, but this isn't even really something I need to track if eating plant-based. The fiber is actually an issue for me, because too much wreaks havoc on my stomach. With 3000 calories a day, I'll me getting a ton of fiber. Do any of you have an issue with this too?

Anyway, this is the meal plan that GPT gave me based on my criteria. Apparently this has 92g of fiber

There are some other foods I would eat too like Kimchi and popcorn. Also not really a fan of eating the bread for breakfast. Any thoughts?



Breakfast: Protein-Packed Avocado Toast with Poached Eggs

• 2 slices of whole-grain bread
• 1 medium avocado, mashed
• 3 poached eggs
• 1 cup of spinach (sautéed with a touch of olive oil)
• 1 medium orange

Snack 1: High-Protein Greek Yogurt Parfait

• 1.5 cups of Greek yogurt
• 1/2 cup of mixed berries (strawberries, blueberries, raspberries)
• 1.5 tablespoons of chia seeds
• 1.5 tablespoons of chopped nuts (almonds or walnuts)

Lunch: Protein-Packed Quinoa Salad with Chickpeas and Veggies

• 1.5 cups cooked quinoa
• 3/4 cup chickpeas (canned, rinsed and drained)
• 1.5 cups cherry tomatoes, halved
• 1 cucumber, diced
• 1/3 cup feta cheese, crumbled
• Olive oil and lemon dressing
• 1 medium apple

Snack 2: Protein-Packed Hummus and Vegetable Sticks

• 3 tablespoons of hummus
• 1.5 cups mixed vegetable sticks (carrots, cucumber, bell peppers)

Dinner: High-Protein Lentil and Vegetable Stir-Fry

• 1.5 cups cooked lentils
• Mixed vegetables (broccoli, bell peppers, snap peas) stir-fried with tofu or tempeh
• 1.5 cups cooked brown rice
• 1.5 tablespoons sesame oil for stir-frying
• Side of steamed kale or spinach
• 1 medium pear

Snack 3: Protein-Packed Smoothie Bowl

• 1.5 cups frozen mixed berries
• 1.5 bananas
• 1.5 cups spinach
• 1.5 cups almond milk
• Toppings: 1.5 tablespoons chia seeds, 1.5 tablespoons shredded coconut, a handful of sliced almonds

 

[Jon822]

3 poached eggs

What? This is ChatGPT's recommendation for a vegetarian diet?

"The fiber is actually an issue for me, because too much wreaks havoc on my stomach. With 3000 calories a day, I'll me getting a ton of fiber. Do any of you have an issue with this too?"

This is a common occurrence in the early adaptation phase because the bacteria that proliferate through your digestion system is dependent on the foods you provide them. When you increase your fiber intake (which is a good thing), you are redistributing the concentrations of bacteria in favor of those that digest the fiber for you. It takes time for this redistribution to take place, and this is what is likely causing the issue you're describing. If it persists beyond the adaptation phase, then it is worth looking into. Otherwise, it's simply an expected result from a dietary change.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[AmazingLarry]

What? This is ChatGPT's recommendation for a vegetarian diet?

"The fiber is actually an issue for me, because too much wreaks havoc on my stomach. With 3000 calories a day, I'll me getting a ton of fiber. Do any of you have an issue with this too?"

This is a common occurrence in the early adaptation phase because the bacteria that proliferate through your digestion system is dependent on the foods you provide them. When you increase your fiber intake (which is a good thing), you are redistributing the concentrations of bacteria in favor of those that digest the fiber for you. It takes time for this redistribution to take place, and this is what is likely causing the issue you're describing. If it persists beyond the adaptation phase, then it is worth looking into. Otherwise, it's simply an expected result from a dietary change.

Yes, haha! I'm guessing the eggs were added to meet the protein requirement.

I'm not on this diet yet, but I've had a history of upset stomach with too much fiber. From what I understand some people's stomachs can just be more sensitive to it. It doesn't bother me THAT bad, and I want the health benefits of fiber so I put up with it. Even on my diet now, I'm getting probably 70-90g per day.

 

[Jon822]

Yes, haha! I'm guessing the eggs were added to meet the protein requirement.

Swing and a miss from ChatGPT.