Jakethehuman

It seems to me that the truth is coming out, and within a decade or two we will have conclusive evidence, the science seems to be moving in the direction of a negative result for meat, obviously just an opinion. The whole conversation is a desperate attempt to reassure people that they are safe and don't need to change their lifestyle in any significant way, again so strange to see this on a philosophy forum. Whole food plant based is the way we are meant to eat, there are no physiological reasons to eat meat anymore. People who spend so much time convincing themselves, and others, that just a bit of meat is OK are not helping address the obesity issue. You tell people it's ok to eat bacon sometimes and they will inevitably use your arguments as an excuse to eat way too much bacon, not to mention eggs and deep fried hash browns and maybe a sausage or two. Instead of moderating and restricting yourself to one steak a week, why not come up with a diet you can eat all day everyday without worrying if you are causing harm. I'm not sure what Lipitor is but I sure wouldn't be taking it, I'm happy to hear you're in good working order yes anything more than a few minutes is not good news in the loo

More sophist crap, do you have an actual response to my arguments or the links I provided that you asked for? Quite an interesting approach to ask for links then ignore them. These guys do a great job of building straw men, he says bacon is good and that scientists have said to eat 400 pounds of wheat a day? The points they are arguing against are in no way related to reality, let alone to my own views.

Not hard to do the right thing, also there seems to be some kind of sick glee in sharing your disregard of animals with other people. Isn't it a sign of sociopathy to hurt animals? Clearly it's different than someone who likes to cut down trees, we all inherently know that other living creatures deserve more respect than they are awarded in our society, which makes it so funny that here on a philosophy forum we find people making jokes about killing animals.

I love the "OMG didn't you know your opinions are soo yesterday" argument from algernon, what is your weight/height and your body fat percentage? Saying that everything is harmful if you have too much is one of the biggest pieces of sophist junk floating around, too much water will not give you cancer it will cause other immediately observable problems, not sure what the point is with apples maybe people mean if you eat too many your stomach will explode (same thing with meat) or perhaps they mean if you eat nothing but apples eventually it will cause some deficiency or something (same thing with meat) (both are arguments from extremes, whereas for millions of people eating a serving of red meat a day is in no way extreme). Do you understand the argument here? To sum up: If there was a study saying that one cigarette a day had no observable negative health effects, but 10 do, would you say "oh well if I just have one I'll be fine!" If you did you'd be insane and clearly your emotions are clouding your judgment because generally if something isn't good to do habitually(smoking, drinking, gambling, calling in sick, lying, bad diet choices etc) it's not good to do even once. If there is something in meat that, when consumed in high quantities, leads to TUMORS IN YOUR ASS, it is not crazy to decide not to mess with that shit at all. Not to mention the facts that saturated fat is bad for your heart (link below) and the caloric density of meat, eggs and dairy, (which is why they have been depended on by our species to become what it is,), is so high, it is very easy for people to over eat and therefore become obese. Do grass fed animals, while surely healthier for humans and the planet, still have saturated fat and a high caloric density? How many people posting here honestly; avoid processed meat, only eat grass fed animals, only partake once or twice a week and avoid smoked products? How many of you think you are healthier than I am on a plant based diet with healthy blood work, done twice a year, 179cm/75kg 9% body fat, and blood pressure at 120/60, never spend more than 5 minutes on the toilet, one thing I will say is you probably smell better seeing as you don't have a perpetual cloud of fart floating around you . People say that vegans are the emotional and crazy ones, ever try telling a meat eater that their lifestyle is bad for them or the environment . "Militant Vegan Propaganda"? Mellomama, no weapons were used in the posting of these comments, I can assure you. Meat is bad for you if you have too much, you should question your motives when you choose to try and convince yourselves that just a bit of a certain kind of meat is still good for you, despite the fact that you do not NEED it to be healthy, and the planet would be a much better place if we didn't eat it, or at least cut consumption by 98%, (watch cowspiracy) Cooked meat Carcinogenic: http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/diet/cooked-meats-fact-sheet http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7447916 Red meat cancer: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22371807 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0020456 Serum Cholesterol and Saturated fat CAD: http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/19711403775.html;jsessionid=7F67FAF36E0FC06BF146AE135102B4AA Dietary Cholesterol effects: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/290/5497/1771

Hahahahaha ohh man great story about your gut, I'm glad you're eating more fruit and veg! Why don't you care that one egg has your daily recommended cholesterol intake? Part of my point with this discussion is that the information is readily accessible and so there is no excuse for not knowing it, just not that interested in it? To me it's like saying an astronaut doing a space walk just isn't that interested in the integrity of his gear. Not only is meat bad for you but there are carcinogens being directly injected into anything smoked or charred, also red and processed meats have been directly linked to cancer did you miss that somehow? This is supposed to be a thread about health, not about how a certain food makes you feel

I haven't imagined anything, anyone who brings up water weight when talking about health is being pedantic. Why couldn't you ask for a definition of healthy right from the start, it seemed like you were trying to make the argument that it is impossible to define "health" because there are grey areas, not helping to move towards a universal definition which I agree is appropriate and necessary. It is really quite clear to me that someone who exercises but eats poorly is unhealthy, why was it an issue for you? Health has nothing to do with knowing, you either are or you aren't, yes there is a sliding scale, "perfect health", the opposite of which would be death, is not attainable with our current technology but we can work towards it. Here is my definition: "The accumulation of daily lifestyle choices that lead to the most optimal functioning of the human body" What do you think? I would also say that someone who eats a donut every now and again, is still healthy even though their choice that day was unhealthy, because it requires constant effort to make the right decisions to become healthy (breakfast, lunch, dinner, snacks, exercise, smoking, alcohol, drugs) it is impossible to say one single choice defines that persons level of health, but they wouldn't be as healthy as someone who never eats donuts.

Let's assume if someone says "gain weight" they mean "gain a significant amount of fat" (semantics from you again), who's talking about a diet, this is lifestyle, day in day out, who cares what some diet does, that has nothing to do with the discussion which is about long term healthy lifestyle choices. You were not asking for a definition of healthy at first, you were Presenting a false dichotomy (fat and fit too!?) and then demanding we take your nonsense as a serious question. There are grey areas but there is also science, it is recommended we eat over 25g fibre a day, Americans on average eat 12g, what does this have to do with a powerlifter? I've said this twice now, I'm talking about the majority of people who don't exercise enough and don't eat enough fruit and veg, I did not start a post to argue about my own personal beliefs about which are the best foods to eat and what is the best type of training to do, if you want to talk about that start another post. This is unbelievable, yes I consider an increased risk of dying to be unhealthy. The problem that most people face in understanding this is that these foods have all the things that humans need + a whole lot of calories, which was the reason humans were able to evolve. But evolution cares not what happens after the organism reproduces so meat dairy eggs have lots of things in them that lead to chronic disease in later life because cave men had a life expectancy in the 20s! You can live strong and healthy, right up till you turn 40 and have a heart attack. I would argue that this is not true health because anything that causes you to die before your time cannot be called healthy, no matter how good it is for your body at the time.

The statistics are irrelevant, if the people who are genetically predisposed lead a healthy lifestyle they wouldn't get fat, how many people honestly are doing everything they can to eat well, and still getting obese, it doesn't happen and it is just a way of muddying the waters by saying it's not all their fault it's in their genes etc. I watched a doco about these kids and the parents were so sad that they couldn't do anything to help the hungry kid, and then feeding him fucking pasta covered in cheese and mince and sauce...

Whatever a gallon of water = in kilos, until you pee or sweat it out. What is your point? You brought up Rippetoe before so I was referring to your line of reasoning in general. That's like saying lots of people have played Russian roulette and not died to it must be safe. Socrates was vegetarian and understood over consumption was wrong and the sign of a sick society. Vegan blood is 10x less hospitable to cancer cells, saturated fat is bad for you arteries, one egg has your daily cholesterol needs, not to mention we produce all the cholesterol we need naturally anyway. Some people smoke their whole lives and don't get cancer, so smoking is healthy? Meat and dairy increase the risks to those already predisposed, and besides that there is no good reason to eat it besides "I like it" if you think our current system of slaughtering and consuming meat is good for anything or anyone you are way off the mark. I have never once mentioned "perfect health" or ideal health, I'm here discussing people that make obvious bad lifestyle decisions that lead to ill health. A point that everyone else seems to understand. Now that I've responded rationally I can say what I really wanted to from the start, you are a pedantic, semantic sophistical fool

Kids with the gene that makes them feel hungry all the time are such a minute part of the population so as to be irrelevant. Let's be clear I'm talking about the people who make bad decisions, whether knowingly or not, that lead to obesity. This is not a mystical issue of how did the big people get big, they treat themselves like shit with their diet and lack of exercise so they get fat. 90% of fat people are in this category, if I can get away with making up stats out of nowhere There are strong correlations between obesity and abuse, a quick search for "obesity abuse scholarly articles" will show you it's seriously wrong. This evidence makes it even more disgusting that people try to find excuses for themselves and others, because not only does it cover up the imminent health threat due to obesity, it stops any line of questioning that will lead to true understanding of the problem.

You can't argue with Newton, if you consume one calorie and then burn one calorie you cannot gain weight. Your body composition can change for sure and you can change all your muscle to fat but you won't get obese if you eat a maintenance diet. I understand that different calories behave differently in the body but yeah can't gain of you don't eat more than you need. Mate this is very boring, pushing extremes to prove that it's impossible to say what is healthy? What is your argument exactly please make one, people who are obese and don't exercise die younger, do you disagree? Because these are the people I'm talking about, not the 1/100000 strongman. Doesn't matter who you are or how you train, meat eggs and dairy are bad for your long term health.

There are no problems with the question, that's why I replied "clearly unhealthy" it's the same as asking if someone with a fit body who smokes and drinks is healthy, it's a very simple question. Calories In vs. Calories Out

Nothing wrong with his numbers and training regime, as long as you use correct form on your exercises do as The Hodgetwins do; whatever the fuck you want to do. He obviously doesn't eat well though. Haha sure man, go nuts

I cannot answer your question definitively as I haven't looked into it, I just did a quick search and there was nothing obvious so I doubt it has even been studied. While there may be slight differences, similar to how women should consume more iron because of menstruation, that is not a big deal because that only equals eating a bit of extra spinach and beans. Everything the body needs can be found in different plants, the only exception being b12, which comes from bacteria in the dirt, and on the rotting flesh of dead animals. Vegan food is not as calorically dense as meat, eggs and dairy, so we have to eat a higher volume in general to meet our energy needs, in the process we get more then enough nutrients and protein from our food. Protein requirements for sedentary adults is about 0.8g per kg of body weight, up to an optimal 1.7g per kg found in a study on atheletes, any more than this just ended up being peed out basically. I couldn't find the study that said that but while looking now I came across this http://m.ajcn.nutrition.org/content/89/1/161.short It says any more protein ingested that required leads to irreversible oxidation, which is very bad. In short again any racial differences will be minuscule due to the relatively short amount of time since we started evolving separately, fundamentally the body needs what it needs and while some things may be slightly more important to some races it is not something to worry about if you are eating a whole foods plant based diet, in my opinion!

I understand your point but if a parent is feeding a child poorly, to the point of early onset diabetes that is physical abuse as you can draw a direct connection between the food being provided and the disease contracted. It is virtuous to eat heaps of fruit and veggies, cook at home most of the time and enjoy exercise with your kids. It is immoral to let a kid become obese because of your bad decisions. I wonder if this example works: so you have a young boy, obese and has just developed diabetes, the damage has been done now and no matter how in shape he gets he will have this glucose guilotine hanging over his head for the rest of his life, he may die young and his quality of life will be drastically reduced because the parents couldn't figure out how to feed him or themselves right. His relationship with his parents can never be truly healthy and loving at this point. Now let's say at the first sign of serious weight gain people confront the parents and tell them things need to change offer them books and links all the relevant info and give them all the help they ask for on fixing their lifestyles, after this if the trend continues the child is forcibly removed from the "care" of his parents, until such time as they prove themselves able to reasonable take care of a child's health. This will undoubtedly be traumatic for a young child, but I wonder what is worse? Having a single traumatic experience followed by care and love and good food! Or an entire childhood of shit food ending up with diabetes air dying from a heart attack at 35, I'm sure the child would pick the first option when he reaches adulthood. I have no idea how this would work in a free society but I know I would not want to like in a place where I could see parents abusing their children daily with food and have to put up with that because it's not serious enough to use force. I imagine there would be some sort of group who would take away children who are in physically abusive households and take them somewhere loving, I suppose they could do the same on the case of obesity.

I'm glad you ask! A great place to start is nutritionfacts.org, a favourite Youtuber of mine is Vegan Gains great content and sources, The China Study is worth a read, my understanding of the "situation" comes from a look at evolutionary biology, homosapiens have spent the majority of our evolution eating a plant based diet, the Paleo fad refers to a relatively tiny fragment of our evolution, 2 million years, compared to the tens of millions spent chewing grass, makes sense our bodies prefer not to eat dead animals in the long term. Now to your foot long, carbs are not the enemy! Although I try to avoid processed carbs I eat 20+ servings of fruit a day. It would be the meat cheese and oily sauce they used, I never get that tired feeling after going vegan even though I stuff my self daily, it is a sign that your body is working really hard to digest your meal. A steak sits in the guts for 3 days and recently red and processed meat has been linked to bowel cancer.

Fair enough there is a lot to be concerned about in the world, I guess I'm so interested in this right now because it's new and it's kinda my idea to work with and understand, rather than just listening to how something is, if you know what I mean? Absolutely! There is a lot to be ashamed of and it will be in text books one day for how not to do society

Why the lack of motivation?

It is my opinion that the external influences on a child's behaviour are all secondary to a healthy (mentally and physically) parents. What I mean is, if a parent uses UPB, NAP, voluntary family and is also a good example with diet and exercise, a child is virtually impervious to any bs coming from "secondary" influences. If it is a parents responsibility to keep a child safe, and a parent has access to the info, and then chooses to feed a poor diet and ignore minimum exercise requirements, they are showing their child that it doesn't really matter what you eat or how active you are, therefore the child will be more likely to pick up bad habits from others around him, directly because the parent has failed in their role as educator and protector. I'm making this up as I go

In my post I talked about people making poor decisions that lead to chronic disease and death, and you responded by saying healthy people can die too. I just wrote this and the comment disappeared but ill try again. Yes if someone makes the choice to become a parent they are no longer responsible for sustaining only their own life through food, but their childs as well, and any neglect in this role that leads to the death of the child is considered murder, and would be dealt with the same as if they had performed the act physically. Therefore if feeding a child bad food leads to chronic illness later in life this can be considered the same as if a parents repeated physical beatings lead to life in a wheel chair. I hope the logic here is sound it works for me but I've got a big bias. That is great to hear, there are lots of crazy vegans and many philosophical meat eaters, glad to meet someone who has it together! I have been doing raw till 4 for a month, and while it is hard to get the right amount of calories due to work who wouldn't love fruit salad all day do you know http://nutritionfacts.org/ ?

This is what I was referring to, after I made a point about people making bad decisions about their health you respond with, "healthy people can die too", or at least that is how I interpreted the paragraph. Yes if it is true that when someone becomes a parent they have chosen to stop being responsible for only feeding themselves but also for sustaining the life of another, and if they don't fulfil that role adequately enough for the child to survive they have committed murder, and they can be held accountable just the same as if they did the act physically. Therefore if the diet inflicted on the child is so inadequate as to cause chronic disease this should be considered the same as if the child is left in a wheelchair as a result of repeated beatings. (I hope my "Therefore" fits before my statement, it makes sense to me but I may have a bit of a bias here) Oh no! I haven't heard his say that about his cancer but it does not surprise me, I've heard other times when someone tried to give him exercise tips and he ridiculed them and the whole idea of using correct form in a exercise, not sure where that comes from but it is sad. I had a call a couple months back and it never got uploaded, I asked if he thought feeding kids poorly to the point of obesity was abuse, and he agreed right off the bat, so my next question was would veganism be more prevalent in a free society, to which he also agreed and went on a short rant about government subsidies, messing with the food pyramid etc etc, so then I asked if he was a vegan, he didn't want to answer, saying only that he ate well. In the planning emails Mike also wanted to push away from the specific nutrition questions I had because he thought people lose interest with that stuff, as they may well do, but even more reason for the truth to be talked about on the show! Not sure what the push back was but I think a "truth about Health" video is well in order! That's so good to hear, there are a lot of crazy vegans and a lot of philosophical meat eaters good to meet another person who has it together. I've been doing raw till 4 for about a month now, which can be a struggle to get calories because of my work, but damn it feels great and how can you not want to eat fruit salad all day! Do you know http://nutritionfacts.org/ ?

"Mark Rippetoe, at 60, deadlifting 500 pounds. Is he healthy or unhealthy?" Clearly unhealthy... So your argument is that you think one day scientists will discover broccoli is bad for you? Come on I'm talking more fruit and vege, more fibre, Americans on average eat 12g when they need at least 25! Maybe the media throws around contradictory statements about nutrition, but the studies are there to be read, and just a bit of reason will help here. Look to evolution, what did our primate ancestors eat and what do they still mainly eat? I'm not sure that I can show you I think you are incapable of understanding. One is a horrible and tragic ACCIDENT The other is a predictable and well documented CHOICE

Children don't have a choice. Like I said diet and exercise are parts of a healthy lifestyle, these involve many daily choices. There is a single decision "I want to become healthy" and yes once you've made it involves many more decisions. Are you arguing there is no difference between a healthy person being hit by a bus and an obese person dying of heart attack? What I meant there was; if you die young and leave young children or teenagers behind, have you caused damage to them that could be considered immoral? When it comes to mental disorders and chronic illness I am with you and the I would love to see a bit more attention directed towards a healthy lifestyle in the freedomain community, I can't stand to see intelligent and rational people treating their bodies badly, Ayn Rand and Christopher Hitchens come immediately to mind. You're not by any chance Vegan are you? Yes of course you're right, I guess I meant is it something that a philosophy show should spend some time discussing. With UPB I am trying to think of a way that it could violate the NAP but it really isn't going to happen, so no slapping donuts out of people's hands, for now.