FOOD PYRAMID FIXED

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Kek based

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >oil is... LE BAD
      ok retard

      The only people who use the outdated Me Bad meme are people with no evidence to back up their opinion

      Seed oils are bad. Animal based fats are good.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Enjoy scurvy

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Do you go around thread to thread making up myths to scare people? I'll bet you're a "creatine makes you bald" poster, too. You should stop posting forever.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          scurvy is a lack of nutrients. even if it was exclusively caused by low vitamin C, if your diet contains low sugar as any carnivorous diet does, then your vit C requirement is extremely low, low enough to be covered by meat consumption. organs specifically. you do know sugar and vitamin C compete for absorption, right? strawman elsewhere

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not to mention that, even if someone did begin to experience symptoms of scurvy, you can literally just go to the grocery store, buy and eat an orange, and the problem goes away. Retards like that poster act like nutrient deficiencies just sneak up on you all of a sudden.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >oil is... LE BAD
    ok retard

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The only people who use the outdated Me Bad meme are people with no evidence to back up their opinion

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >backing up your opinion with facts is... LE GOOD

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Seed oils are bad. Animal based fats are good.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        what about the other fats?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        *Ruminant based fats are good
        Pigs and chickens are fed high PUFA seed crops and thus have high PUFA content in their body fat.
        Even grain-fed cattle have a fraction of the PUFA that grain-fed monogastrics have.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >PUFAs bad

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            not falling for your trick Chaim

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              enjoy your shit health i guess?

              Do you actually think omega 3 is bad for you? Really?

              Post your disgusting bodies so I can laugh.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Do you actually think omega 3 is bad for you? Really?
                lesser evil, not necessarily good

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >omega 3 isn't good for you
                Why do you even have an opinion on something you've clearly done zero research into?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Why do you even have an opinion on something you've clearly done zero research into?
                wrong
                http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/fishoil.shtml
                >inb4 schizo source
                he cites all the studies in his article, you can read them if you want to know the truth

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >inb4 schizo source
                >"Some of the important antiinflammatory effects of fish oil result from the oxidized oils, rather than the unchanged oils (Sethi, 2002; Chaudhary, et al., 2004). These oils are so unstable that they begin to spontaneously oxidize even before they reach the bloodstream."

                >"In experiments that last just a few weeks or months, there may not be time for cancers to develop, and on that time scale, the immunosuppressive and antiinflammatory effects of oxidized fish oil might seem beneficial. For a few decades, x-ray treatments were used to relieve inflammatory conditions, and most of the doctors who promoted the treatment were able to retire before their patients began suffering the fatal effects of atrophy, fibrosis, and cancer. (But a few people are still advocating x-ray therapy for inflammatory diseases, e.g., Hildebrandt, et al., 2003.) The fish oil fad is now just as old as the x-ray fad was at its peak of popularity, and if its antiinflammatory actions involve the same mechanisms as the antiinflammatory immunosuppressive x-ray treatments, then we can expect to see another epidemic of fibrotic conditions and cancer in about 15 to 20 years."

                Haha wew. It's not a schizo source, it's an "I don't understand what I'm citing" blogpost. Maybe you should read the citations and figure out why this retard is arguing that reducing chronic inflammation is a bad thing and that it's going to cause cancer because.. acute radiotherapy caused cancer? Come on, this is retarded. It's something a failing freshman would do; slap a bunch of vaguely relevant citations on and hope nobody bothers to look.

                Chronic inflammation causes cancer, in addition to its well-known deleterious impact on cardiovascular health. Comparing radiotherapy to omega-3 intake is a bizarre juxtaposition that clearly shows this person - and by extension, you - does not have a fucking clue what they are talking about.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Omega 6*
                fixed that for you

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >hurr hurr gotcha! omega 3 is a PUFA therefore PUFAs aren't bad!
                Who let the 14 year old who just discovered Wikipedia into this thread?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >LDL is cholesterol therefore cholesterol is bad
                What you're saying is equally retarded.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Who said LDL is cholesterol? I never said that LDL is cholesterol. They are 2 fundamentally different things. Why would you make up some stupid shit and attack that instead of just discussing what I actually said? Are you suffering from delusions?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            enjoy your shit health i guess?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Oh no hahaha the skinnyfat kid with the heart of a 80 year old called me a chud how will I recover now?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          double the vegetable intake to compensate with the lack of starches and you'd be ok

          domesticated ruminants have a lot more saturated fat than healthy wild animals

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >double the vegetable intake to compensate with the lack of starches and you'd be ok
            Complete nonsense not based on any fact. I'm not even sure what you're referring to could "not be ok" unless you mean fiber (lol).
            >domesticated ruminants have a lot more saturated fat than healthy wild animals
            False.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >domesticated ruminants have a lot more saturated fat than healthy wild animals
              He's right, but only because domesticated ruminants are fatter than wild ones. Chilling all day without worrying about predators let's you get fat, uh-maize-in
              Also this retard probably doesn't understand
              >per capita
              either

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Oh that's hilarious, I would have never thought of that haha.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        You can't prove that animal fats are good because all available evidence says you are wrong

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >all available evidence
          there's no actual evidence. it's all correlation garden gnomery on selected samples. and then there are two big outliers that prove them very wrong :
          France eats a shit ton of saturated fat and has very low heart disease and one of the lowest obesity rates in Europe
          Israel eats a shit ton of PUFAs through seed oils and has one of the highest heart disease rate in the world

          [...]
          Do you actually think omega 3 is bad for you? Really?

          Post your disgusting bodies so I can laugh.

          you can eat as much omega 3 as you want retard, PUFAs are also omega 6 and it's already known the average western diet absolutely wrecks your natural balance of these two
          you can't get more omega 3 without stuffing yourself with omega 6 with industrial seed oils. so the best way is to remove seed oils from your diet, and get your (actually useful) omega 3 from fatty fish

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >you can eat as much omega 3 as you want retard
            So... PUFAs aren't bad.
            >Seeds bad
            Flaxseed, including oil? Chia?
            >there's no actual evidence. it's all correlation garden gnomery on selected samples.
            That is evidence. Fucking hell, just shut the fuck up.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >PUFAs aren't bad
              DHA and EPA aren't. Except the only way to eat them is human breastmilk, or fatty fish/shellfish.
              There's none of those in seed oils.
              >flaxseed
              Flaxseed oil goes rancid extremely fast. It's merely a condiment that needs to be refrigerated and consumed immediately for this reason. France's FDA had it banned for a century for that reason. Same shit for chia because it has a similar fatty acid profile. Those aren't goybean/sunflower/canola oils that are added in every single garbage industrial product sold nowadays.
              >that is evidence
              >bro just select a few statistics and conveniently discard outliers, show some pattern and that is evidence
              jesus, the absolute state of modern "science". you don't start from the conclusion and cherrypick data that works out for you.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >you don't start from the conclusion and cherrypick data that works out for you.
                But that's what you're doing by cherry-picking population studies and fixating on the French paradox (which is 40 years old, they're as fat as everyone else now) and ignoring larger population studies.
                >Flax goes rancid; same shit for chia.
                I have an open pack of chia seeds in my cupboard from like 3 years ago, they're still good. Nobody is telling you to dose your food in oil; cooking your food in oil is inherently retarded.
                >DHA and EPA aren't (bad)
                Omega-3 is a precursor to both.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >That is evidence. Fucking hell, just shut the fuck up.
              You have to be utterly retarded and have no background knowledge of any statistics to think that correlation is evidence of causation of anything, ever.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >correlation is evidence of causation
                That's not what I said, I said it is evidence. Dismissing correlation as evidence is fallacious and also retarded. It is exactly what Big Tobacco did to dispute the links to cancer, it is exactly what the radical left does to dispute the links between black people and violent crime; if you are doing the same thing you are either intellectually dishonest as with Big Tobacco, or intellectually deficient as with the left.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                So you will agree that the graph I posted is "evidence" of cheese consumption causing death by bedsheets...? Because, if you don't, that makes you a hypocrite.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >So you will agree that the graph I posted is "evidence" of cheese consumption causing death by bedsheets
                Yes, it is weak evidence.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Why is it weak evidence? The correlation is much, much higher than the correlation of any study you can find relating "animal fat consumption" to any bad outcome. Based on this conversation, I'm going to assume you aren't even familiar with any such study. I'd like you to find one, read it, and post it here discussing the results if you are a genuinely curious person.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Why is it weak evidence?
                Propose a mechanism, produce at least some of it in vitro, better yet in vivo, and/or do a controlled study and it may become part of a stronger body of evidence. This is how we have our current theory of atherosclerosis. The latter task is very difficult with nutritional studies - it just isn't ethical to control for dietary variables in a human cohort for any length of time.

                You seem to be conflating me with the person who said "animal fats aren't good" - but I'm arguing that omega-3, found in fish, is good for you. I'm just calling you out for the bizarre opinion that correlation isn't evidence; I have no idea why anyone would believe this.
                >I'd like you to find one, read it, and post it here discussing the results if you are a genuinely curious person.
                I'd like a set of Nike Chicagos, OG, from the 80s. This is for my Miles Morales Halloween outfit, you understand.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, the current mechanism is that LDL randomly diffuses into the wall under high-pressure conditions and that causes an immune response and plaque build-up. That's a shitty mechanism and it doesn't account for differences caused by HDL or metabolic dysfunction, both of which are MASSIVELY important in predicting cardiovascular disease.

                So out of your criteria you have:
                >1 weak mechanism with no explanation of confounding factors
                >partial in vitro production of the mechanism
                >no controlled study

                This is not convincing at all. If you are convinced by this, you would be convinced by anything any newspaper article says after quoting any person with "Dr." in their title. Correlation is not evidence of any mechanism, ever. Correlation is evidence that 2 things correlate. That's it.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >the current mechanism is that LDL randomly diffuses into the wall under high-pressure conditions
                No, it really isn't. It's facilitated by transfer proteins and this has been replicated in vitro.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You should look up what "diffusion" means. Here's a link to start you off, please enjoy:
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facilitated_diffusion

                Also, yes, pressure obviously matters, hence why we don't have coronary "artery" disease in veins. You would know this if you read any of the studies you are claiming exist. Please don't respond to my posts with irrelevant and incorrect factoids again.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >You should look up what "diffusion" means.
                I clearly know what 'diffusion' is; in any case, SR-BI is an example of active transport.
                >Also, yes, pressure obviously matters
                We've had this conversation before and you were wholly unaware that transport proteins were involved in the process of atherosclerosis at all. I am not disputing that pressure is involved - I previously told you about 'venosclerosis' in CABG - you are claiming it is the sole mechanism and you are not satisfied by that explanation; you are simply misinformed.

                >1 weak mechanism with no explanation of confounding factors
                >no explanation of confounding factors

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >i clearly know
                I don't clearly know you know anything because I'm not you and I don't know you. lol. That's something a little kid would say.
                >SR-BI
                I don't know what your niche protein is but this is what I found:
                >SR-BI functions as a receptor for high-density lipoprotein in the liver
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCARB1

                So I truly have no idea what you're talking about. I wish you would just post some kind of source instead of spouting off random facts. You sound like you memorize a bunch of niche facts and force them into a narrative you can't let go of or modify. Sounds perfect for an average medical student. You'll be a fine doctor, but I'll be a better one 🙂

                btw no one cares about CABG. when you do primary care or whatever low-effort field you plan to go in, your patients will be obese out of shape fat fucks getting heart disease because they eat 4 servings of fish and chips every day. you will put them on statins and they'll do ok and then die at 75. you'll never learn about how inflammation and metabolic dysfunction cause heart disease because you'll never care because your patients will never listen to you and change their lives because you're not a smart, respectable person. that's why you'll just prescribe them textbook statins. you won't change any lives. you'll just make people able to live worse lives for longer periods of time. that's why you'll never be a good doctor. but you'll do fine.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >You sound like you memorize a bunch of niche facts and force them into a narrative you can't let go of or modify. Sounds perfect for an average medical student.
                >You'll be a fine doctor, but I'll be a better one 🙂
                >your patients will never listen to you and change their lives because you're not a smart, respectable person.
                >that's why you'll never be a good doctor. but you'll do fine.
                Cringeworthy.

                >I truly have no idea what you're talking about.
                >I wish you would just post some kind of source instead of spouting off random facts.
                Sure, but it doesn't seem like you're going to be able to interpret or remember any of this, because we had this conversation less than 48 hours ago and you're still just as stupid. How are you even at medical school, or are you just larping?

                >https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.130.suppl_2.11607
                >https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/ATVBAHA.120.314557

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Hahaha this is why I love posting on IST.

                From your source:
                >Retention of LDL beneath the arterial endothelium initiates an inflammatory response culminating in atherosclerosis.
                >How LDL crosses the endothelium to enter the arterial wall remains unknown.

                Your post talks about inflammation being the driver behind atherosclerosis and the mechanism of LDL crossing the endothelium being unknown, but here you are pretending like inflammation isn't the driver of atherosclerosis and how you know the mechanism perfectly. God, you are so insufferable.

                I looked back on the thread you keep desperately mentioning and I noticed I was the last one to respond and you completely ignored my post on epidemiology, metabolic dysfunction, & inflammation. Which is hilarious because that's exactly what we're talking about right now "and you're still just as stupid."

                Anyway, you're a mediocre person with mediocre intelligence and you'll be a mediocre doctor. Don't beat yourself up, being average still makes you average doctor salary. Enjoy being a pill pusher for the rest of your life.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >here you are pretending like inflammation isn't the driver of atherosclerosis
                I've never said this.
                >how you know the mechanism perfectly.
                I've also never said this, although clearly, I do understand the mechanism better than you do.

                >Anyway, you're a mediocre person with mediocre intelligence and you'll be a mediocre doctor. Don't beat yourself up, being average still makes you average doctor salary. Enjoy being a pill pusher for the rest of your life.
                Take your meds. Doctor's orders.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >i know the mechanism better than you do
                Congratulations on memorizing a bunch of niche proteins & vaguely recalling some pubmed studies you read once. No one will care in the future because none of that actually matters (unlike what actually causes heart disease). That's why you'll be prescribing pills to 19-stone Nigel & 21-stone Ahmed for the rest of your life and you will never be a good doctor.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You should look up what "random" means. Facilitated diffusion can hardly be said to be "random", the clue is in the name.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The "random" means in the context that some people get heart disease and others don't. If you need further help understanding my posts due to your poor grasp of the English language, please let me know. I'd be happy to clarify.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Correlation is evidence that 2 things correlate.
                So it is evidence.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, much like the way you existing is evidence your mother is a whore.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >It isn't evidence!
                >Oh wait, actually, it is evidence!
                Well, which is it, Dr. Chud?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Is English your second language or are you just trolling at this point?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                800 people a year dying from bedsheet tangling? Is that US only or worldwide?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                No idea but if you look up "spurious correlations" you'll find more of them. It's great to BTFO the retards who claim epidemiology is evidence of any mechanism, like you see ITT.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                can u be serious ? i get tangled in bedsheets often and im wondering if i should be taking preventative measures

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                lol if you're not a baby or a very disabled old person you shouldn't worry my man...

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >sometimes random things correlate and is le LE FUNNY
                >this means otherwise you cant ever use high correlations between connected things with an underlying mechanism explained and statistical significant and various other proofs all working together in multiple studies
                only on IST
                you guys are seriously the most retarded place on the internet

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                wtf do you mean you can't "use" correlations? you sound like a complete retard because you have no idea what you're talking about.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                based retard with no reading comprehension kek

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You are making up arguments with vague language and then calling them retarded. You're like a crackhead who argues with himself on the street. Please stop posting forever.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I assume he's pointing out how retarded you are for continuing to reject the notion that evidence of correlation is a form of evidence while arguing (with yourself) that correlation ≠ causation (which nobody is disputing).

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You have to assume because what he is saying is unclear because his post was low-effort. btw your points are also incoherent because you're speaking so vaguely.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                His post is crystal clear. At this stage, it is clear you are either ESL and/or PMLD, and attempting to engage you in further conversation is pointless. Enjoy your evening.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >c-correlations are evidence!
                >evidence of what? underlying causes? no they aren't. they're just evidence of correlations
                >s-see! correlations are evidence!!

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >epidemiology is evidence of any mechanism
                Nobody said that ITT.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                do the sheets wrap around their neck or something?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >its all correlation on selected samples
            >proceeds to give only correlated examples on selected samples
            Lolol

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              [...]
              Not him but the point he's making by offering examples of correlation that directly contradict other examples of correlation is really obvious and how you can't see that is pretty cringe.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >all available evidence
          Well when you speak like this it's really easy to prove you wrong. Animal fat contains a lot of cholesterol and high cholesterol levels correlate with longevity in the elderly.

          There you go, I just objectively proved your ridiculous statement wrong. I will not be accepting any response from you other than "Wow, I guess I was wrong on that. But here are some contradicting sources. Can you please clarify how this is possible when I believe something different, based on this evidence?"

          But based on your post history I'm going to presume you will not respond or you will act like an angry woman, instead of acting like a genuinely curious person. Please prove me wrong.

          https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140673697044309
          >Total cholesterol and risk of mortality in the oldest old
          >Each 1 mmol/L increase in total cholesterol corresponded to a 15% decrease in mortality.
          >Mortality from cancer and infection was significantly lower among the participants in the highest total cholesterol category
          >In people older than 85 years, high total cholesterol concentrations are associated with longevity owing to lower mortality from cancer and infection.
          >The main cause of death was cardiovascular disease with a similar mortality risk in the three total cholesterol categories.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >high cholesterol levels correlate with longevity in the elderly.
            Wrong

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              True because studies that support my viewpoint are good and redpilled.
              Those who say the opposite are false and done by garden gnomes
              Simple as

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >After the age of fifty, low cholesterol is clearly associated with an increased risk of dying from a variety of causes. A study of old women indicated that a cholesterol level of 270 mg. per 100 ml. was associated with the best longevity (Forette, et al., 1989). "Mortality was lowest at serum cholesterol 7.0 mmol/l [=270.6 mg%], 5.2 times higher than the minimum at serum cholesterol 4.0 mmol/l, and only 1.8 times higher when cholesterol concentration was 8.8 mmol/l. This relation held true irrespective of age, even when blood pressure, body weight, history of myocardial infarction, creatinine clearance, and plasma proteins were taken into account." - Ray Peat

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Any more ravings of a kook?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                why don't you try to email the man himself anon? he will give you guaranteed replies

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >After the age of fifty, low cholesterol is clearly associated with an increased risk of dying from a variety of causes. A study of old women indicated that a cholesterol level of 270 mg. per 100 ml. was associated with the best longevity (Forette, et al., 1989). "Mortality was lowest at serum cholesterol 7.0 mmol/l [=270.6 mg%], 5.2 times higher than the minimum at serum cholesterol 4.0 mmol/l, and only 1.8 times higher when cholesterol concentration was 8.8 mmol/l. This relation held true irrespective of age, even when blood pressure, body weight, history of myocardial infarction, creatinine clearance, and plasma proteins were taken into account." - Ray Peat

              You don't need to invoke Ray Peat because he'll just throw the word 'schizo' at it. The Minnesota Coronary Experiment (eventually, once they stopped hiding data) showed that PUFA lowers cholesterol, and lowering cholesterol increases all-cause mortality

              >There was a 22% higher risk of death for each 30 mg/dL (0.78 mmol/L) reduction in serum cholesterol in covariate adjusted Cox regression models

              https://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i1246

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Omitted variable bias. Lifestyle is notoriously difficult to pin down a ceteris paribus effect on.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/Pk7b2zh.png

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >bananas and apples are keto
          What did he mean by this?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            If that is the same person who posts "ketoschizo" in every nutrition thread, every day on IST for the past few months or however long, he is an actual schizophrenic person who also posts non-sensical on reddit. I have no idea how he has so much free time.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >has a reddit nemesis
              Can't make it up

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >vegetables and fruits are keto
          you are the only schizo on this board, and another proof that you are a butthurt vegan

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Im convinced it just random anons posting it at this point. Guarenteed (you)s

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >>oil is... LE BAD
      >ok retard
      It's seed oil that is bad you dumb bitch.

      Saturate-Fats VS No-Saturated Fats.
      - In the past we thought Saturated fats were bad.
      - Nowadays we understand that it's unsaturated fats that are bad. Why ? Short answer Oxidization. Long answer : it's complicated.

      Here, educate yourself.

      30 min of full explanation, all you need to know on the topic
      Once you've seen thewhole thing and understand the problem at hand, you will get why people on IST always advocate to never use seedoils, and only use Olive oil (or coconut oil) in their cooking and especially on their plate.

      Do be aware that alot of processed foods have hidden seed oils in them, as the video explains.
      Hence the importance of Whole Foods, and Organic stuff /Farmer's market products that remain untampered with, so they there's no liquid garden gnome fucking up your otherwise healthy lifestyle.
      You gon' learn today, boy.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >and only use Olive oil (or coconut oil) in their cooking and especially on their plate.
        Cooking oil is still... Problematic.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >>and only use Olive oil (or coconut oil) in their cooking and especially on their plate.
          >Cooking oil is still... Problematic.
          Yes, that's what I said.
          I just saids that putting it DIRECTLY in your plate, versus indirectly, is what's most concerning.
          It literally says in my post to not use seed oils for cooking.
          But thanks anyways, I guess, for reiterating my point.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It literally says in my post to not use seed oils for cooking.
            THIS
            You can cook with only oils that can withstand high heat.
            Basically: butter, GLEE (which is a butter product) or coconut oil.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              or tallow.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Any free fat is bad. No nutrients, empty calories
        >hurrr you need it on salad to absorb--
        No you dont

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >never heard of fat soluble vitamins
          this bro is RETARDED

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >No nutrients
          Wrong

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          the human brain literally cant be health without animal fats

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >the human brain literally cant be health without animal fats
            Wrong

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Wrong
              Wrong

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >literally
            Lol okay buddy post body (you won't)

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Any free fat is bad. No nutrients, empty calories
          I'm not even sure to understand what you're saying, when you say "Free Fat" but whatever you think it means, you're wrong.
          You sound really stupid.

          >never heard of fat soluble vitamins
          this bro is RETARDED

          >this bro is RETARDED

          >No nutrients
          Wrong

          >Wrong
          Glad other people here more knowledeable than me can tell you that you're wrong.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      what kind of retard are you that you cant realize that there are enough fats in meats to satisfy the daily requirements? do you need to be told to ADD fats to your diet? topkek.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    actually, a well rounded and balanced diet promotes healthy gut bacteria.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    you forgot to get rid of the added sugar triangles

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You could probably put grains in the use sparingly place sweets and oils were at. You certainly don't want to eat them at the level the left pyramid says, and you don't particularly need them for anything, but oatmeal or whole wheat bread from a sandwich every once in a while aren't going to kill you.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The point of the picture is not to make a chart of things that kill you based on how much you consume of them, retard. You should never be eating grains (for health purposes), ever. They provide no unique nutrition, cause bloat, fuck up your intestinal cells, and are generally a horrible food group for humans.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        t. ketolard gutlet

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Do you genuinely think people on keto are the only people who don't eat grains? What if I told you I eat fruit and honey every day?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Do not engage with this gay, he is a grainbrain (coombrain but from empty carbs) who can’t imagine having the self control to abstain from eating worthless food that only gives you immediate satisfaction like pasta

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine caring this much about food.
    I just eat what I want and what makes me feel good, and that I know is fresh and from proper sources.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Wait until you grow up a little and are in charge of the food your wife, children, and pets eat. Then you'll start caring a bit more and stop posting memes on the internet about how cool you are.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        As if me and most people on this fucking website will ever have a wife and kids kek

        I've literally given up on trying to get girls and now I'm focused on more important things than these thots

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This isn't terrible, but swap veggies portions for dairy, and add in EVOO for an acceptable oil. Dairy and meats should be the base.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Good points; coconut oil would be great to add, too.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yes

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Not him but the point he's making by offering examples of correlation that directly contradict other examples of correlation is really obvious and how you can't see that is pretty cringe.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I didnt give any examples so he's arguing against a his own construct, idk

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    fuck you
    life without bread is not worth living

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      t. Intestinal worm

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >mfw when the slaves love their grain sludge so much they refuse to live without it

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    What about porridge or rice? You need a few carbs to give you energy and help with protein synthesis

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >carbs
      Fruit, honey, dairy. White rice is good, too. (Other) grains are worthless.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    That’s basically my diet

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Okay and?

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    add tallow and ghee and the top

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You forgot energy drinks

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It shouldn't be a pyramind. Nutrition comes from animals. You can eat what you want so long as it is understood where nutrition comes from. If you want to eat nuts go ahead, but they are nutritionally empty, all bio unavailable. They just taste nice. I eat nuts, oranges, grapes, apples, carrots etc but I'm not stupid enough to think they equate to salmon or a sirloin steak which post-war generations have been misled to believe.

    tldr; do not eat goyslop, eat natural foods from whatever group so long as the foundation of the diet is animal foods, as was the case before WW2.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Nutrition comes from animals.
      All nutrients come from plants

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        No, a nutrient BIO-AVAILABLE TO HUMANS must go up the food chain; organisms lower on the food chain eat plants and bugs and have the digestive capability to turn that food into compounds that can be digested by humans. We evolved eating animals higher on the food chain. It's why we cannot digest bug protein anywhere near as efficiently as red meat. Stop coping with modernist nonsense.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >a nutrient BIO-AVAILABLE TO HUMANS must go up the food chain
          Wrong

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Wrong
            Wrong

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          If efficiency was the sole marker of proof that your point is correct, the human body proves you wrong. The human body is inefficient at a number of things, it doesn't mean that humans are supposed to eat mostly meat. Thats a stupid argument

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Wtf does this even mean? All life comes from the sun and every "nutrient" is in a repeating cycle on Earth. What a weird statement.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          What a ridiculous statement, all life comes from God

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    fixed

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If you add good fats - like you can add grass-fed cow butter to the milk and cheese group - you are done.

    In US, most of the yogurt is garden gnomed with sugar and produced from low end milk.
    I would even replace yogurt with butter.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      No added fats are good. They are empty calories. For 1 tablespoon of oil you could have an apple and a half or a few more ounces of chicken or like a pound of greens. Displacing your nutrition with free oil is bad

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >. For 1 tablespoon of oil
        Where did I say ANYTIHNG about liquids or tablespoons?

        Grass-fed BUTTER is what people ate forever.
        They are not empty calories.
        Fat is what every cell in your body is using for energy. You can't really avoid them.

        Also. Fat-free or low fat milk is garbage, it is a counterfeited product. It should be , again, whole milk or raw cow milk.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          I was comparing calories. It was an accurate comparison as oils and added fats like grass fed butter are commonly measured in tablespoons. Added fats are unhealthy as they displace nutrient dense foods. Just because people historically did something does not make it beneficial.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Define "added fats" then.
            Can you get a fat that is required by every cell of your body, from somewhere else?
            Ok, other than avocados and nuts.

            Grass-fed butter is what people ate to have much better children development. In the last 100 years we have massive teeth and narrow jaws problems, kids basically under develop. No billions of dollars of toothpaste and brushes will change that teeth and jaws aren't being fully developed in kids.
            Our ancestors ate butter for this and drank raw cow milk and ate goat cheese.

            >nutrient dense food.
            Like what? Give me examples.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              I answered literally both your questions but apparently you can't comprehend them or something. Have a good day

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Ok let me try slower.
                Give me a LIST of foods you consider fats that are non-added.
                And food you consider nutrient-rich.
                I am sure it's not white flour or candy, but I just want to hear a couple :))

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I literally did. Literally.
                Wow.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Grass-fed BUTTER is what people ate forever.
          People have been eating dairy for about 8,000 years.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            People have been eating seed oils for about 80 years.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Just saying you are full of shit. Humans have eaten grains longer than dairy.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not the original poster you were responding to and frankly I have no idea what you're even trying to say. Butter is pretty much exactly the same as animal fat, which humans have been eating for hundreds of thousands of years. Our hunter-gatherer ancestors ate 0 grains and 8000 years is not enough for a major evolutionary change in our digestive systems.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Butter is pretty much exactly the same as animal fat
                Wrong

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Ok please name a difference or two.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Ok please name a difference or two.
                You are the one making the claim.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Laziest poster ITT gets awarded to you. Congratulations.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Our hunter-gatherer ancestors ate 0 grains
                We’ve been eating grains for about 100,000 years, maybe longer. Not farmed grains, but whole intact grains from wild plants.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                yes but the point is that eating whole grains from time to time and getting 20% of your calories from seed oils and another 60% from processed grain is very different
                see picrel. we were never meant to eat this kind of fat in anything else but very small quantities

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                That's a wonderful picture in a horrifying kind of way.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >the cream off the top off churned breastmilk is the same as intramuscular fat
                No

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Ok please name a difference or two.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Wow so that must make it good for me

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            -fed BUTTER is what people ate forever.
            >People have been eating dairy for about 8,000 years.
            Buddy, the whole history is made up past 300 years ago.
            I personally believe we've had past more advanced civilizations and we are here hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of years. There's lots of evidence to support this.
            You can't really tell than they ate diary 8000 and not 80,000 or 800,000 , it's has no factual evidence, "some random person said".

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >I personally believe we've had past more advanced civilizations
              My girlfriend believes this to be the case, as well, but it's just a hunch for her. Can you link some evidence so I can show her?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Off top , but evidence:
                >pyramids on every continent. hundreds of them
                >pyramids and structures under water
                >look at a bunch of indian temples - massive and impossible to build structures
                >look at massive number of so called "roman columns" - thousands upon thousands of them. Some are so precise it was impossible to engineer without machinery
                >massive strange roads everywhere on every continent (you have to dig for this as this is being censored)
                >various megaliths and megalithic structures of completely unknown tech
                >lots of technologies that look very strange and very engineering intense - look at different arches in lots of cities, like Paris Arch de Triumph , look inside how it is a very tech structure , this is common to all arches still standing
                >look at massive structures all over that are called "roman ruins" . some of them are impossible to build if you only have an army that goes around and captures things. Some of them are massive or built for x3 times human size which is absolutely insanely waste of time and effort if "romans" being soldiers ever did it

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Thanks anon, I appreciate it.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Anon, you are welcome.
                >under water pyramids and structures are also censored
                >star fortresses - very strange technology
                >what they call "roman aqueducts" - some of this is strange technology
                >marks of nuclear war - literally half of the ancient city ruins look like the stone leaked (stone all leaked at the tops of buildings!)
                Once you open your mind you'll see that there's huge amounts of impossible techs around us. Good luck

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Search for Gobekli Tepe
                It's the best SCIENTIFIC evidence for Pre-Historic great civiliations.
                Or rather, Pre-Sedentary Civilisations.
                Nomadic Civilisations might have been more advanced than we previously thought.

                It is cutting edge, currently being debated, type of Science.
                So who is your Go-To for this kinda shit? Joe Rogan of course, LMAO

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    here's the real one

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >protien supplements
      >multivitamin

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        That pyramid has to be satire. If that poster is really eating a majority diet of meat, there is 0 need to eat "protein supplements." I mean are his calories really meat + protein powder + vegetables? How does that even work?

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous
  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >1 banana
      >2 glasses of milk
      >3 heads of cabbage
      I think your pyramid is a bit off.

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    fat is in milk/cheese

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine the flatulence.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >t. 50g of protein a day

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    move eggs and nuts with dairy, then put dairy on top with 1 serving, add 2 servings of whole grains to the middle layer

Your email address will not be published.