Food is amazing.

>Golden Era
>Steak, Whole Eggs, Cheese, Milk, Butter and Fruit and Salads once in awhile
>Cancer Era
>Carbs, Carbs, Carbs, Supplements, Synthol,
Will never understand the bloat turtle bodybuilding era
Steak and whole eggs are amazing.

Ape Out, Gorilla Mindset Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Ape Out, Gorilla Mindset Shirt $21.68

  1. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Vince Gironda approves

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      I didn't realize carbs was the new sacred cow on IST lol

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Terrible legs

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Post legs

  2. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    You're a moron if you think they didn't eat carbs back in the day lol.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      You're literally moronic if you don't think they are frickloads of carbs and got plenty of cancers back in the day.

      Don't get me wrong, both of those things have worsened with time, and INCREASED consumption is a co-cause, however eating no carbs and only the things you listed is a quick ticket to dying regardless thanks to a frickin' coronary.

      Enjoy both in healthy moderation to not kick the bucket or feel like shit.

      bot replies

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        bot reply

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >no no dude you definitly need carbs golden era BBs ate carbs

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >eating a few potatoes is the same thing as this

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        I recommend one potato every day when dieting. You stay remarkably full and it has a lot of nutrition. Don't let the ketoschizos trick you

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >ketoschizos
          Are they in the room right now?

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          I eat potatoes ad libidum on a cut. But they are the only carb I will eat.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        I cannot believe nearly all of humanity fell for this horseshit

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          You can't believe some Am*rican corporation tricked generations of people into ruining their own lives?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            That corporation being the FDA, who also gave us such wisdom as "sure percocet is fine lmao hand them out like candy"

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            That corporation being the FDA, who also gave us such wisdom as "sure percocet is fine lmao hand them out like candy"

            The food pyramid comes from Sweden, you fricking idiots.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              that's the american pyramid i posted doe

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          No they didn't, no population ended up eating like that food pyramid

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            you're either
            1. lying
            2. pretending to be lying

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            >born yesterday

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              you're either
              1. lying
              2. pretending to be lying

              He's right though, they've always eaten high fat alongside. The food pyramid would be a low fat diet

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                I like your point but that image seems moronic, misses heaps and should probably be just veg fat vs animal fat consumption

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Just because we continued to eat fat, doesn't mean he is right. The majority of the people in first-world populations DID believe that the Food Pyramid™ was the correct and healthy way to eat

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >The majority of the people in first-world populations DID believe that the Food Pyramid™ was the correct and healthy way to eat
                Yet virtually no-one actually ate that way, so it's irrelevant. The few that did were probably emaciated cardio nuts, not fatties.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                And then they got diabetes or heart disease from their "heart healthy diet"

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Possibly, but that doesn't detract from my point. I'm not arguing the food pyramid is optimal or healthy, only that a) it was never widely followed the way schizos pretend it was, and b) has nothing to do with the obesity endemic

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                What do you think they base school lunches on? How about in nursing homes, the military, hospitals, or required by law any institution that receives federal funding? Such a weird cope

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                school lunches didn't happen okay!!! ignore the fact that public school, which is the school most people went to and go to bases their nutrition off the food pyramid

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                school lunches didn't happen okay!!! ignore the fact that public school, which is the school most people went to and go to bases their nutrition off the food pyramid

                The carbs in school lunches and cafeteria food are generally things like pizza and french fries - i.e. 40%+ fats. Not fricking plain bread and grains. Like I said, no population has ever actually ate like the food pyramid suggests.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >low fat pizza

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Not sure what level of copium this is
                >nobody ever followed these legally mandated guidelines

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                What do you think they base school lunches on? How about in nursing homes, the military, hospitals, or required by law any institution that receives federal funding? Such a weird cope

                It's a slave diet. It goes against human intuition, so it's not surprising people won't follow it if there is an alternative. The problem is eating all those carbs and then adding fat on top of it. It's the diabetes death spiral.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        I remember I stared at this when I was a child. I went home, and ate 11 slices of bread. I was 6, 11 slices is basically a whole loaf of bread.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          can't tell if real story or mockery

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >golden era
      >back then
      do you morons know the terms you're using?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      They definitely didn't eat as much sugar or snack as much in general. They also drank far less sugar.

      But they ate less so of course they ate fewer carbs as a result.

  3. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    You're literally moronic if you don't think they are frickloads of carbs and got plenty of cancers back in the day.

    Don't get me wrong, both of those things have worsened with time, and INCREASED consumption is a co-cause, however eating no carbs and only the things you listed is a quick ticket to dying regardless thanks to a frickin' coronary.

    Enjoy both in healthy moderation to not kick the bucket or feel like shit.

  4. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Golden Era
    You forgot a copious amount of roids. Bronze Era bodybuilders were actually natty and they had varied diets, including some vegetarians.

  5. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    golden era were dyels compared to modern era. Even some natties mog golden era

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous
      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Arnold drank beer constantly lmfao

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          epic story but i don't see how that proves these guys look dyel.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            No I'm saying these guys had plenty of carbs

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        modern bodybuiklders have more mass while not being fat as arnie and the two Black folk here

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        why did arms look so much better back then? is it because bb these days spam lat raises? side delts look outrageous now, outshines the arms aesthetic appeal

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          I think you're right about the delt vs arm ratio being better back then. The protruding delts look goofy and make the arm seem less impressive. Also modern bbers dont seem to train forearm much.

          Another thing though is that they're higher body fat back then and that makes them look more aesthetic imo.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Absurd levels of volume means over-training, over-training your entire body = disproportionate arm development, because arms stand up to volume better. It's not that their arms are necessarily disproportionately large, just that the rest of them is a bit underdeveloped enough to be noticeable.

  6. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Whole Eggs
    FRICKING RIGHT I don't care if the whites are "more nutritious" according to some science BS I'd eat the shell too if there wasn't salmonella in the membrane.
    Also eat fruits and vegetables like a horse

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      you can eat the egg shell if you prepare it right (i think)

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        You can bake em or just let them dry out on the counter, then grind them in a shake or something. You can get pasteurized eggs and just eat the whole thing raw if you want.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      I eat the membrane all the time from boiled eggs. A bit time consuming to get it out but there's tons of collagen in it. Fixed my knee pain and it never came back.

  7. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Red meat is carcinogenic.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      but they're not, why would you say this

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        You been living under a rock for the past 40 years?

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why would something we're meant to eat and have been eating for centuries without problems be bad

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            You don't understand the purpose of evolution. After we've had kids and have stuck around long enough for them to have kids, evolution doesn't care whether we live or die. That means by the time you're 35. The genes that allowed us to procreate and see our progeny procreate have been passed down.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              I'm a creationist. and if i were an evolutionist i would say it's pretty clear we evolved to eat meat for our benefit and no downsides

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Clearly there's nothing I could say that will change your mind, so just continue believing whatever you feel like, I'm sure it doesn't matter.

                >These categories represent how ~~*IARC*~~ confident is
                >Probably
                >Possibly
                >Probably
                yeah ok then

                Not an argument

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Have you ever considered that you're not saying anything true and that's why you don't change anyone's mind?

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >creationist who doesn't even understand the basic premise of evolution accuses others of misunderstanding the truth
                only on IST lmao

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >guy saying moronic things determines that it must be everyone else who is wrong for not believing him and that they are the REAL close minded individuals

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                don't you mean Probably not an argument, or possibly not an argument?

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              A 30% change in relative risk in an epidemiological study means absolutely nothing. If you want to make the assertion that red meat is unhealthy, you need to provide:
              A mechanism scientifically confirmed mechanism for how red meat is carcinogenic.(doesn't exist)
              A valid theory for why the inclusion of red meat (as opposed to other foods) is reproductively beneficial despite the health effects and the associated lack of familial investment due to early death.
              A theory for why humans have not adapted to consume red meat without health problems over the 3.5 million years that they have been eating it.

              Even then, you only have speculation.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                honestly the idea that we somehow kept eating meat despite it being bad is the flipped version of people saying we somehow kept eating vegetables despite them being bad

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Not necessarily. Civilization brought about populations who were living on 95% grains. In that context, low-calorie nutrition in the form of vegetables would have been essential.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                That's terrible for you though. Its why they were all manlets

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Right, but in that environment vegetables would have been required despite all their potential problems. Agriculture was essentially trading health for population growth and it's associated competitive benefits. But then, these populations eventually get bodied by robust meat eating nomads/barbarians.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >these populations eventually get bodied by robust meat eating nomads/barbarians.
                nice homosexual fiction

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous
              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                But we were eating vegetables before that

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                In times of scarcity, perhaps. We still retain a vestigial ability to ferment a small amount of fiber. They say we ate around 20% in volume of
                low-calorie fibrous tubers, so like more than 95% calories from meat. Even then, fibrous shits are more likely to have been fossilized, so you can argue archeological bias.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                hardly true, civilization was actually brought on by the people whose slaves ate primarily grain and gruel

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                red meat is unhealthy, this study with outcomes supersedes everything you said, also Antagonistic pleiotropy ensures that if you are really adapted to something then it means said thing unhealthy in the long term
                >Heavy intakes of total and red meat were associated with an increase in all-cause and heart disease mortality in men

                https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7737902/

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >associated
                Why do you people constantly fall for this shit?

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                tell me a single disease in the history of medicine that wasn't based of an association

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Anything that is causal will be associated, but not the other way around.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                in that japanese study is very clear meat was behind the increase in mortality, this is very obvious since there's also clinical data would support why it did, but I can explain you why meat was the reason behind the increase in mortality in that study if you want

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >What are confounding variable
                Explain to me how healthy participant bias is not a factor. Tell me that people who eat more meat are not more likely to smoke, drink alcohol, or have more money to overeat.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                yeah i know you were going to bring up confounding as an argument, the thing is in that study the people that ate the most meat were also the ones that smoked less, drank less alcohol and also had the same weight and same level of physical activity as the ones that didn't eat meat as much.
                so pretty much every confounding variable you can think of actually favoured those eating the most meat and despite that they still had more heart disease mortality and all cause mortality

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >every confounding variable you can think
                If you understood science, you would know that for every confounding variable you can think of, there are ten others that you haven't.
                > the thing is in that study the people that ate the most meat were also the ones that smoked less, drank less alcohol and also had the same weight and same level of physical activity
                Show me where on the paper then. And also, show me how over 14 years the researchers were able to confirm precisely what every participant was actually doing.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >there are ten others that you haven't.
                ok could you elaborate what those ten others are besides the ones i have already mentioned because those are the typical ones people bring up when they critizice epidemiological studies
                >Show me where on the paper then
                it's on table 1, ctrl + f "current smoker" and ctrl + f "alcohol intake"
                >show me how over 14 years the researchers were able to confirm precisely what every participant was actually doing.
                you can look at that yourself in the method section is a prospective study, it's more of an approximation than precision which is pretty good since asian populations have a very homogenous eating pattern and therefore are very reliable in what they eat or not

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                It's over meathead, time to unlike all those sv3rige videos now.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Go frick yourself. Now I actually looked at that moronic study. Pick rel is all-cause mortality and Q4 is the high meat group. The association only exists due to statistical adjustment aka hazard ratios, aka fricking with the data to get the desired result. Regardless, the difference in deaths is not statistically significant enough to draw any conclusion whatsoever.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Everyone should look up a food frequency questionnaire to see what they use to generate this garbage that gets passed off as science

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Antagonistic pleiotropy ensures
                It doesn't ensure anything. It is merely another selective pressure that can be superseded by others for a multitude of complex reasons.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                yes it does, humans traded long term health for short term reproductive success by eating meat, it make sense since humans would eat anything they found back because food was always lacking then and all that mattered was ultimately to be able to reproduce

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Nice theory, but that is all it is. You have to prove that the selective pressure from antagonistic pleiotropy is significant enough to affect the lifespan compared with others that increase it, such as not eating sugar, or thousands of other potential reasons why the inclusion of meat and the associated absence of another food might increase longevity.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Nice theory, but that is all it is
                nope, is a reality since it's known saturated fat from meat is unhealthy, but meat is nutrient dense so it would help pre historic people to survive enough to reproduce, how unhealthy meat was, was also not so much of a big deal for them since most people in pre historic times never lived long enough for chronic diseases such as heart disease to effectively manifest, but we live long enough now so now the effect of Antagonistic pleiotropy clearly shows up in our evolution and the saturated fat from meat being unhealthy is proof of it

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                no proof of meat or saturated fat being bad and there never has been

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                in that japanese study is very clear meat was behind the increase in mortality, this is very obvious since there's also clinical data would support why it did, but I can explain you why meat was the reason behind the increase in mortality in that study if you want

                yes it does, humans traded long term health for short term reproductive success by eating meat, it make sense since humans would eat anything they found back because food was always lacking then and all that mattered was ultimately to be able to reproduce

                >lower case poster
                >the posts are some type of homosexualry
                It's like near 100% of the time, somehow. This phenomenon needs to be studied.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                You really have no sense of nuance or the complexity of systems. There are many many variables that contribute to how and why things are. Yet, you insist on these one-track explanations.
                >saturated fat from meat being unhealthy is proof of it
                There is not proof. What you are spouting is nothing more than a theory. As I have said, antagonistic pleiotropy is a single selective pressure among many. Antagonistic pleiotropy is also referred to as a hypothesis for a reason.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Heavy intake
                Oh so if you just eat beef once or twice a week like a normal person, nothing happens.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      No but your posting is

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Our bodies are literally made from meat and we need to eat it since it contains all the building blocks our meat (bodies) need…eating bodies is bad for our bodies!!!

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      but they're not, why would you say this

      https://i.imgur.com/TvuZ2EU.png

      it's over...

      >These categories represent how ~~*IARC*~~ confident is
      >Probably
      >Possibly
      >Probably
      yeah ok then

      It is almost certainly carcinogenic, but IARC is VERY particular to emphasize that this rating is for how certain the causality is, not the effect size. They’re also certain chocolate has enough flavonoids to reduce cancer, but if you look at the literature the effect size is minuscule (but definitely significant). Red meat definitely increases your risk of colon cancer, but the effect is tiny. That matters on a population level, but on an individual level abstaining from red meat won’t do much for your cancer risk.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        A panel of vegan and vegetarian "experts" declared red and processed meat cause cancer by ignoring the most important evidence
        >Most importantly for the IARC report, two major dietary intervention studies that should have contributed to the assessment of the claimed relationship of red meat and cancer were not considered. The first was a study of colon polyps, the precancerous growths that greatly increase the likelihood of developing colon cancer. Almost 1,900 subjects with a recent history of having a polyp removed were divided into a control group that ate their usual diet and a group following a diet characterized by significant decreases in total fat, red, and processed meat along with increases in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes (Schatzkin et al., 2000). Participants were followed for 3 years and at the end of that time, the recurrence of colon polyps was identical in both diet groups. It is possible that the precancerous stage may not have been the proper time for dietary intervention. The Women’s Health Initiative, therefore, studied a low-fat diet, achieved in large part by reducing red- and processed-meat consumption, among almost 49,000 women (Beresford et al., 2006); about 30,000 followed their normal diets and almost 20,000 were assigned to low-fat diets. After 9 years, the rate of colon cancer was almost identical in the low-fat and control-diet groups. These studies strongly suggest that the observational studies are not supported by dietary intervention studies at either the precancerous or malignant tumor stages of colon cancer.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Who? What are their names? How do you know they’re vegetarians? What evidence are they ignoring?

          Or are you pulling that out of your ass because it fits your narrative?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Don't know don't care. Doesn't matter because you have no argument

  8. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    it's over...

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >These categories represent how ~~*IARC*~~ confident is
      >Probably
      >Possibly
      >Probably
      yeah ok then

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Imagine just winging it on cancer because "bacon yummy"

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      You know lifting heavy prevents cancer right?

  9. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    I can tell just from how you write your IQ is 105 tops. Good luck out there

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      105 is top 40% of the population

  10. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Read how Schwazenegger dealth with his protein demands in the Austrian army.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Can't find it online, how'd he do it

  11. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >filters food pic
    what a moron

  12. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    i have been toying with my diet for awhile to try and optimize my digestion (get out a good shit every day) and the answer seems to be meat, fruit, eggs, yogurt, honey and a few well cooked greens here and there. Just totally eliminate PUFA. I can't stand any of the low calorie diet foods, just total garbage. CICO is true in some respects but if you eat for health your body will catch up, metabolismmaxxing.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      how do you poop every day?

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        you don't?

        what is metabolismmaxxing?

        It is getting your metabolism to operate at its peak efficiency (boosting your maintenance calories) by eating the foods that you are biologically supposed to and optimizing your hormones through the food you eat. Dr. Ray Peat just died but he was a pioneer on this shit. You essentially get your body to burn like 3k calories per day.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          i poop maybe 2 or 3 times a week usually

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yea then you gotta get you metabolism in check, almost everybody shits once a day

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              are you sure? pretty sure my metabolism is good

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      what is metabolismmaxxing?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      For me, perfect digestion consists in eating eggs (boiled, scrambled, or just the yolk, raw), cheese (can be cottage cheese) and meat or fish, cooked in butter. If I stick to it, my stools are fricking spotless, and I feel the best.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        2 or 3 poops a week guy here, how do you get your poop to not be really sticky and cause infinite wiping problem?

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          I don't drink coffee or consume anything containing caffeine, for one, which just signals your body to take a SHIT just as it reaches your stomach. Hot or liquid fats are also to be avoided, just like dairy in any form other than butter or cheese. Fruit, vegetables, or any kind of sugar I do also avoid. Nuts seem to be fine in small amounts.

          Exactly I mean it's not talked about a lot but I used to eat like shit and be constipated for days at a time and fixing it changed my fricking life. Nothing better than a good one.

          check'd

          https://i.imgur.com/4UgD8Xu.jpg

          When I did a diet eating 20+ eggs a day I barely pooped at all. I dont mean I was constipated, I mean there was just like no poop. The entire egg was just absorbed into me

          Dude, eggs are THE perfect food, unironically. I eat at least six every day. Also, check'd x2.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            oh ok, i try to not eat too much caffeine stuff, but i'm gonna keep drinking milk

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              >but i'm gonna keep drinking milk
              Alright, ideally you should try to drink it raw, and A2 if it comes from a cow. Your digestion will be much, much better.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                maybe, i'm not lactose intolerant doe

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                it's not about lactose, but protein (beta-casein).

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                i see, i'll look into this but i highly doubt removing milk will do anything for me since milk is the one thing that's stayed pretty much the same throughout my changes in pooping and dietary pattern

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                raw milk is illegal in my state, cannot believe this fascist oppression

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                The fda are like a caricature of a dysfunctional government entity from a bad novel

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                We will fix it, this mf is going to be elected president and bodyslam big agriculture.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Eggs are very based but they are slightly too high in fat so I can't use them as my main protein source. I like to do relatively high carb, medium fat kind of diet and I consume a ton of protein so I need chicken breast or the like. Still often have like 2-8 eggs in a day though, I might be imagining it but I think I notice better muscle recovery when I have eggs than when I dont.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Insoluble fiber will help with stickiness. Soluble fiber will make it worse.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Exactly I mean it's not talked about a lot but I used to eat like shit and be constipated for days at a time and fixing it changed my fricking life. Nothing better than a good one.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        When I did a diet eating 20+ eggs a day I barely pooped at all. I dont mean I was constipated, I mean there was just like no poop. The entire egg was just absorbed into me

  13. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    You can still eat like this, might just have to wait a while because of all the fricking price gouging going on.
    >carbs are le bad!
    Everything is bad for you in high amounts. Also swapping the type of carbs you ingest every couple months helps your body recognize what to filter out and what to absorb.

  14. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >eating food
    it's indeed incredible but that's nothing, wait till you discover drinking water and breathing in air.

  15. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Milk and fruit have carbs
    Also body builders ate a ton of rice and potatoes back then.
    The only thing you got correct is that body builders nowadays do a ton of drugs and little cardio.

  16. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Wait til you look at a cook book from 100 years ago and realise that every single meal was dominated by a meat or fish and that carbs went from being embellishments to activists and israelites pushing them as alternatives to real animal foods.

  17. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Sup ketolard

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *