Modern Day Paleos Have it Wrong: We Were (mostly) Vegetarians

guerilla said:
To me, the greater sin is eating processed food, rather than meat.
Click to expand...

Processed food, processed awareness, processed morality...consuming anything processed by the suicide cult called modern civilization will probably lead to sclerosis of something. Go out and find Bambi and put an arrow in her. Clean and butcher, put on the grill and eat. She'll be delicious and you'll learn a lot in the process. And I fucking love animals.

Feeling kinda dark today. I blame Google.
 


eliquid said:
Im not agreeing/disagreeing.. but wanted to point a flaw in your reasoning only.

As long as the meat eaters can reproduce and those offspring can reproduce before they die, then "meat eaters" as a whole will not die off.

Its not how long you live, but if you can reproduce and in how much quantity.
Click to expand...

That's why I have 3 to 5 kids a year and make them eat nothing but meat.
 
Yea, and then we started eating fish rich in omega fats and evolved larger brains than all of the other animals so we could build the internet and talk about how dumb it is to eat the very shit that allowed us to evolve in the first place.

That article is fucking stupid in that it takes into account what current primates are eating. Hurrrr, wonder why they haven't evolved yet... durrrrr. Current primates have absolutely no reason to expend more energy than necessary to catch and eat animals. Apparently, our ancestors found themselves in a position where they had INCENTIVE to catch and eat large amounts of fish rich in fats (you know, the shit our brains are made of?)... the influx of such a useful compound combined with the fact that catching and eating fish/animals requires much more thinking than picking a fucking berry makes us the glorious gay webmasters that we are today.

Put them fucking chimps on and island with only a river full of fish and come back in a couple thousand years then write your stupid fucking article Scientific American.
 
guerilla said:
'The China Study' and 'Forks over Knives', links to critiques | Julianne's Paleo & Zone Nutrition
Click to expand...

All the "critique" there are from bloggers micro arguing straw man arguments. That's (bloggers) who I get all my useful information from. Those and tabloids and magazines. Not people with scientific careers at the NIH for 30 years, ostracized for not sucking the meat and dairy industry pee hole.

I eat carne asada every now and then, but I think the main point comes down to processing your own food from whole ingredients. Which that book emphasizes. That book also doesn't tell you to go vegan, but reduce your animal protein to 10% of what you eat. It claims when you eat 20% or more of your diet as dairy, meat, eggs, that it increases your body's prone-ness to developing disease.

I too just had blood work done and my precursors for heart disease were at <0.2 where 3.0 is average on a scale of 10.0.
 
Yeah, and average life expectancy of Paleolithic ancestors was like 35 or something, so I think I'll stick with eating meat.
 
lose lose win said:
That article is fucking stupid in that it takes into account what current primates are eating. Hurrrr, wonder why they haven't evolved yet... durrrrr. Current primates have absolutely no reason to expend more energy than necessary to catch and eat animals. Apparently, our ancestors found themselves in a position where they had INCENTIVE to catch and eat large amounts of fish rich in fats
Click to expand...

How could they have been aware of any extra incentive? Some fish may have washed up on shore, and then from there they might have tried to figure out ways to catch them. But as far as knowing that eating fish would have hidden benefits, there is no way for them to have known, anymore than the current orangutans do..


Gone Fishing, Orangutan-Style : Discovery News

Orangutan goes fishing with sharpened stick - Telegraph

apeMS2604_800x575.jpg
 
Kiopa_Matt said:
Yeah, and average life expectancy of Paleolithic ancestors was like 35 or something, so I think I'll stick with eating meat.
Click to expand...

If you want the true Paleolithic experience then you have to go live in a cave and shit.
 
I made Beef Vindaloo for dinner. There were tomatoes and onions involved. Some cilantro too.
 
shindig said:
All the "critique" there are from bloggers micro arguing straw man arguments. That's (bloggers) who I get all my useful information from. Those and tabloids and magazines. Not people with scientific careers at the NIH for 30 years, ostracized for not sucking the meat and dairy industry pee hole.

I eat carne asada every now and then, but I think the main point comes down to processing your own food from whole ingredients. Which that book emphasizes. That book also doesn't tell you to go vegan, but reduce your animal protein to 10% of what you eat. It claims when you eat 20% or more of your diet as dairy, meat, eggs, that it increases your body's prone-ness to developing disease.

I too just had blood work done and my precursors for heart disease were at <0.2 where 3.0 is average on a scale of 10.0.
Click to expand...

Did you actually read the critiques?

The China study is flawed and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CN7PF10RKo]Resolving the Health Care Crisis: T. Colin Campbel at TEDxEast - YouTube[/ame]
 
dafonz said:
Did you actually read the critiques?

The China study is flawed and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
Click to expand...

You couldn't tell me what the China study was about. I've read it. Sad you claim something based off an opinion formed by bloggers on the internet. Having no idea what it contains.

Link #1 in that site is
HTML: 
http://rawfoodsos.com/2010/07/07/the-china-study-fact-or-fallac/
First Line under Heading:
Disclaimer: This blog post covers only a fraction of what’s wrong with (opinion of blogger)
Click to expand...
Link #2 from same site, rawfoodssos

Link #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9 same blogger, probably makes good money being cited (by people like you) across the internet.

Skip down past the video to....more references:

http://healthcorrelator .blogspot. com/2010/07/china-study-with-large-enough-sample.html

and a whole list of 10+ more "articles" from that same blogspot page.


If anything, it's one of you backlinking your blogs, which get referenced constantly on the internet as "sources" for everyone too lazy to question "how you currently do things".

Like I said, you couldn't tell me what the china study was about. The largest point of it wasn't veganism. In fact, many vegans don't adhere to the main principles of the book.
 
Moxie said:
How could they have been aware of any extra incentive? Some fish may have washed up on shore, and then from there they might have tried to figure out ways to catch them. But as far as knowing that eating fish would have hidden benefits, there is no way for them to have known, anymore than the current orangutans do..
Click to expand...

Exactly my point... the article references current primate diets as if it's something that should be taken into account when deciding on how you should eat for yourself. That's just stupid. Like you said, there is no way for them to know what will benefit them, so they eat what is most abundant, easiest, and tastiest to them. Much like "more evolved" humans. Until they are put in a situation where they would HAVE to depend more on animals for nutrition, they would never be able to use the extra fats, proteins, and mental exercise to evolve. So to reference current primates, as the article does, is plain dumb. There's a reason they didn't hop aboard the evolution train... they weren't forced to. I would say that it would only be in retrospect that the benefits would be clear to them, but after reading this, it seems that isn't the case either.

I guess I'm unsure of your point... kinda seems like you are arguing in support of what I said, not sure.

Either way... lock some fat cheese burger eating bitch in a house with nothing but healthy food and she will get the benefits. Put primates in a situation where they have to eat fish, they will get the benefits. But neither will choose to do so on their own because they're both fat lazy monkeys. Basing your diet on theirs is ridiculous. I can't believe this shit passes as science.
 
shindig said:
You couldn't tell me what the China study was about. I've read it. Sad you claim something based off an opinion formed by bloggers on the internet. Having no idea what it contains.

Like I said, you couldn't tell me what the china study was about. The largest point of it wasn't veganism. In fact, many vegans don't adhere to the main principles of the book.
Click to expand...

Actually, I have read the china study and I've read a ton of other stuff related to health and dieting too as it's a hobby of mine.

Plants good, animal-based protein sources bad. Good summary of the china study? If not, feel free to provide me with a better one.

I linked to denise's critiques because she explains quite clearly what is wrong with the interpretation of the data. Are they wrong? If so, please feel free to point out where.
 
lose lose win said:
Basing your diet on theirs is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

What the article is saying is that the current human digestive system was formed primarily in response to that type of diet. If we force humans to eat nothing but ice cream for millions of years, the human system will change. Maybe vegetables and fish would still be more healthy for people after that time period, but the "ice cream diet" would at least be worth looking into.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back