>eat meat
>build muscle
>live longer
>tastes great
What's the downside?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Meat Increases Fitness And Longevity
>eat meat
>build muscle
>live longer
>tastes great
What's the downside?
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
There isn't one, although you also need to eat calories consisting of carbohydrates for optimal performance.
What's the supposed benefit of carbohydrate?
There isn't one. People who are carb-adapted need carbs for optimum performance. That's what they miss out. All kinds of strength and athletics can be performed optimally without carbs provided there is sufficient metabolic adaption.
That makes sense. Plenty of animals perform amazing athletic feats without eating any carbs at all.
Those animals are obligate carnivores. Humans are omnivores.
>six months to complete
Man, this timeframe keeps stretching out longer and longer. How did humans survive if they were weak and pathetic for 6 months during the fat adaptation period?
>Since I'm fat-adapted carbs usually make me perform worse, I feel sluggish and I lose that feeling of "lightness" and energy that comes from a carnivore meal.
Correct. Your body has "forgotten" how to process carbohydrates, so you experience post-prandial hyperinsulinemia.
>So since almost everyone is carb adapted it's hard for them to understand how anyone could perform without carbs since it does for them is give them low energy.
No serious lifters or athletes exclude carbohydrates except during a cutting phase. There are a few outliers, but even the ketogains crew incorporate carbohydrate strategically to enhance their workouts.
You have this moronic dichotomy of carnivore vs. vegan. There is a definite anti-meat political sentiment fueled by progressive politics (environmentalism, animal welfare) but most people follow a mixed diet.
Humans are apex predators. Higher trophic level than other predators.
They didn't have an adaptation period. We do because we eat onions from childhood.
yes and gorillas eat 10kg of salad everyday and can deadlift a ton so you might just as well eat a bunch of leaves and get superstrenght
you argument is dumb
Human digestive systems can't get nutrition from plants.
Oversimplify it, why don’t you?
Weird how they do then
Yeah I don’t know. I know this thread is probably bait like all the other nutrition posts but I really felt better when I as carbs before lifting, and I had been doing keto to cut for a while. I successfully lost weight but I found I could still maintain pretty easily even after adding carbs.
Were you ever obese?
The adaption can take a long time to complete, as long as 6 months. If you're doing keto to lose weight it's not really the same thing as your body is catabolic generally and not in peak performance mode. Also "keto" doesn't really mean anything, you could be eating keto chocolate bars and be doing "keto". It's more about eating high quality animal foods rather than any focus on macronutrients.
I've been low/zero carb since about 2017 and I did my best natty PRs as carnivore actually. I was eating about 3000 calories, lots of cheese eggs and red meat. I don't usually eat that much though. Since I'm fat-adapted carbs usually make me perform worse, I feel sluggish and I lose that feeling of "lightness" and energy that comes from a carnivore meal.
Carb and fat metabolism are somewhat mutually exclusive; the consumption of one inhibits the metabolism of the other (I think it's called the Randle cycle or something like that). So since almost everyone is carb adapted it's hard for them to understand how anyone could perform without carbs since it does for them is give them low energy.
>Carb and fat metabolism are somewhat mutually exclusive; the consumption of one inhibits the metabolism of the other
The variance is massively overstated and everyone is constantly using both fuel sources. The randle cycle just explains how the body upregulates and downregulates each fuel source.
Beta oxidation of fatty acids for energy is constantly happening in even the fattest carb-slurping American.
Yes, it's true that if you eat a high carb meal, you will start burning more carbs as a % of energy, but this is a far cry from fuel sources being mutually exclusive.
I hate this keto myth about the randle cycle.
The variance is extreme and this is most obviously seen in the latest research on cholesterol and "lean mass hyper responders". Fat adapted people on a low carb diet have a COMPLETELY different lipid energy transport profile. They aren't just using more fat for energy. You are talking about the variance within groups that are carb adapted, which is typical of much research literature.
>the latest research on cholesterol and "lean mass hyper responders".
Post it.
I've seen a presentation where mitochondria actually change shape as people become fat adapted. It's a physical change that happens on the cellular level.
The question is which mode is optimal for human health? History suggests that fat burning mode is preferential.
> History suggests that fat burning mode is preferential.
How do?
Humans ate exclusively meat for 2 million years. Agriculture introduced carbs and human height shrank and brain size also shrank. We also started getting diseases that meat-eaters never got (e.g. obesity, diabetes, arthritis, tooth decay).
>Humans ate exclusively meat for 2 million years
There is no evidence that the entire species was ever exclusively meat eating.
The ones that evolved into humans ate meat.
Source: my feelings
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.24247
The article doesn't claim what you think it claims. It only makes the case (which I didn't dispute) that humans or our ancestors have undergone periods of predominant meat consumption.
That's not the same thing by a long shot as being exclusively carnivorous, even if it was the primary selective force.
>Nonetheless, a background consumption of plants and smaller prey is expected when women gather and do not participate in hunts
Stop dealing in moronic absolutes like "humans are ONLY meat for 2 million years" when thats a wildly different proposition to "meat was our primary food source for 2 million years"
>when women gather and do not participate in hunts
The latest ꜱoyience says women were actually better hunters than men, chud.
bread, rice and fruits are yummy and ketogays seethe at this undeniable truth
Energy
Performance
Taste
If you're a seasoned long distance runner or do high intensity lifting weekly, then you probably want carbs as you'll most likely never find enough good quality protein for glucose. But these two forms of exercise are unhealthy long term.
Bloat and being sluggish unless only eaten before and after gym
you can profit on its addictive proprieties by selling it to people who wont stop wanting more
Lots of
But people believe only sugar is carbs so we have this crossboard ozempyc spam
>What's the downside?
gotta see the same 5 pics spammed by the ketoschizo posters
No catch, just fulfilling basic human needs and instincts (y)
is that a reference to MSN messenger thumbs up?
i'm slightly too young (25yo) to have used MSN, but I used (y) on Skype because it would automatically convert to the thumbs up emoji and that was quicker than pressing the button for emoji keyboard and clicking the thumbs up
oh yeah, microsoft probably put the msn messenger shortcuts in skype when they bought it
checked and taught me something; i always thought MS made skype in-house, had no idea they bought it
damn I forget sometimes that I'm an old frick, back in my day Skype was the p2p thing, and then MS bought it and made it even worse
>breathe
>build muscle
>keep cells alive
>extend lifespan
>feels great
what's the downside?
I'm not even vegetarian, but this chart lacks context. For one, it combines child mortality on the left with meat eating life span on the right. If those two things are combined, of course richer countries are going to eat more meat and have a longer lifespan.
The point of including child mortality is because it highly influences lifespan statistics. For example hunter-gatheres had an average lifespan of 40 or something but they would commonly live into their 70s without clean water or sanitation. Statistics like these only make sense when child mortality is given attention.
>Statistics like these only make sense when child mortality is given attention.
that's my point, it doesn't make sense, given this chart, to say that eating meat makes you live longer. in fact, the child mortality rate being exponential compared to the linear life expectancy would lead me to believe the opposite.
It's an associative study.
What it does very resoundingly is prove that the psyops against meat are based on lies. What is their motivation to get us to stop eating meat?
higher population cap due to cheaper and cheaper food requirements. We're easier to oppress if we're all packed together, densely populated and killing eachother for it.
They want us weak, dumb, and sick all the time.
>What is their motivation to get us to stop eating meat?
Can't keep up this rate of production at a stable price, but if prices go too high then the industry could have a crash. Meat needs a frickton of space, even those compact jailhouse style factories.
Onions makes more food in less space than meat, and at a faster rate. It's marketed towards the poor population because of this. Basically both industries are working together to achieve maximum profit without damaging the other one.
No, they're hedging their bets in case meat gets outlawed at the stroke of a pen. There are huge forces at work when it comes to what gets made that aren't child's storybook fantasies.
>hedging their bets in case meat gets outlawed at the stroke of a pen
You're delusional. Meat will never be outlawed, it's only going to get more and more expensive over decades of population growth until only the wealthy can have it regularly just like during medieval times. Onions is on track to fill in that gap by being inexpensive and easy to produce, AND it can be flavored and given the approximate texture of meat which current marketing is trying to push into the mainstream.
They're closing farms in the EU under the guise of emissions right now as we speak. You don't know what you're talking about.
He knows what he is doing: lying.
Supporters of the regime will always lie to reach their goals.
They're closing farms in the EU because it's cheaper to import food from South America now.
That doesn't make any fricking sense whatsoever. If it was cheaper to import food then the farms would be closing themselves due to lack of customers, not the government shutting down them for other reasons. You people don't fricking think about anything.
Lying about what? We're talking about the same result in the end; the rich get meat and the poor get s o y. For some moronic reason you think meat is just going to be signed away in a law. I'm sure that will work out just fine, just like the temperance movement did.
>No reply
I accept your concession
>What is their motivation to get us to stop eating meat?
Hate to go all Christian on you but there you go.
I am starting to believe leftists really are cursed by God. They are sick twisted troglodytic creatures.
Holy crap dude seriously go outside. Everything is leftists with you what is your deal
>It's an associative study
Meanwhile the pic you posted
>could
>What it does very resoundingly is prove that the psyops against meat are based on lies.
There is no psyop, society WANTS you to eat meat because the meat industry is influencing and lobbying every part of our existence, politics, studies etc.
When you look at the actual science though, it doesn't look good
See:
,
,
thats not real science. All clinical trials have shown no relationship between any kind of meat and CVD cancer or mortality
>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.
https://academic.oup.com/af/article/8/3/5/5048762
Correlation does not mean causation. That being said, you need to eat meat to stay healthy. Vegetarians and vegans frick themselves over for no reason. Just make sure to eat in moderation and to stay away from excessive amounts of ultra processed shit
I heard that the gays like eating carbs, no thank you.
Oops!
Oh no a screenshot
The OP is also just a screenshot
It's a picture of someone that eats a lot of meat the effect on them. Pictures of people that eat vegetarian look like zombies.
>vegetarians look like zomb-
Why is he covering his face?
>that level of photo manipulation
lel
>After correction for measurement error, higher all-cause mortality remained significant only for processed meat
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23497300/
Oh no veganbros even our own sources BTFO the anti-meat agenda.
Oops
>harvard school of public health
Lol. Lmao, even.
Oops
Maybe we should just cut to the chase and check out a large population-level analysis?
>Total Meat Intake is Associated with Life Expectancy: A Cross-Sectional Data Analysis of 175 Contemporary Populations
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8881926/
Meat makes you live longer?!?! Oh no, that's not what they want us to believe. I guess you are pretty upset about free speech.
This study just shows that richer people with access to better healthcare are able to afford to eat more meat.
t. Omnivore
It shows meat is beneficial for their health.
>access to better healthcare
So they can get mRNA injections? How much does that extend lifespan?
Richer people have better lifespan than poor people in every society. They eat better quality food, can afford best doctors and can pay for faster treatment, less likely to be exposed to environmental pollution, unhealthy living conditions, etc. It's difficult, bordering impossible, to subtract all these intra population effects when comparing different populations.
I don't believe meat is inherently harmful to health, but studies like this don't prove it. They just prove that wealthier populations are healthier than poor populations.
Rich people have healthier habits. They smoke less and they eat more meat.
There is a huge false narrative about poor Americans that healthcare makes you live longer in a significant statistical way.
It's like when they thought people in Norway were happier because they had free access to psychological therapy (they don't).
>There is a huge false narrative about poor Americans that healthcare makes you live longer in a significant statistical way.
Who said americans? It's true almost everywhere on earth.
Wealthier people = longer lifespan, at whole-population level.
Wealthier people have access to higher quality food, in my country poor people eat bread and deep fried shit from the street while only the rich have access to meat.
Great, this study still doesn't prove meat is responsible for their longer lifespan.
Do you seriously believe people that eat frosted mini wheats and lucky charms are healthier than people that eat red meat? Can you just please get serious for a moment and make that claim instead of fricking around.
No he doesn't believe it. That's the problem with leftists. They are goal oriented like sled dogs. They just pull in one direction without thinking about it.
Vegans know their diet is self-destructive. That's why it is such a massive virtue signal. If it was good for health you couldn't tell the difference between pious vegans and selfish vegans.
They know it utterly destroys human health. That is why they think it makes them holier.
I'm just sick of these fricking people that can't see two steps ahead on any subject. They're like animals. "ALL MEAT GOOD" "ALL VEGETABLES GOOD" No, there's just food that is meat, and vegetarian, and keto, and any other diet.
*there is junk food that is
those people are eating processed garbage meat and grain/onions/corn fed beef that lead sedentary existences in factory farms
hong kong has highest meat consumption and longest life expectancy and they are probably eating mostly grain fed
I'd love to see a study focused on consumption of grass fed, pasture raised ruminant meat-eaters and life expectancy
>should warrant further investigations
This means "We found a link but we don't know what it means. Someone should try and replicate our findings and find out what mechanism or other correlating factor explains this link."
What the authors are not saying:
>We proved (processed) meat kills people
>Americans who eat even more food more likely to die from obesity-related problems
STOP
THE
FRICKING
PRESSES
pack it in boys we've got a screenshot
Why are there like 5-10 carnivore shill threads a day on IST?
is it just 1 dedicated autismo?
Probably backlash against Moxyte spamming.
Oops
Oh shit!
How is mTOR related to meat consumption?
Oh no
Essential BCAAs give us energy. Wouldn't it stand to reason that the mechanisms that fuels us would also fuel cancer? Should we starve ourselves to starve cancer?
cancercells consume energy at double or third the rate of regular cells, so yes, fasting for certain intervals can potentially slow or kill cancer that is trying to develope in your body
Wow all these puzzle pieces are painting the picture that they really, really, really don't want us to eat meat.
And yet populations eating more meat live the longest... hmm....
Wait a minute
>muh blue zones
This is such a strangely childish fantasy. I don't understand how fully grown adults buy into this storytelling.
>higher proportion of animal protein to total proteins
>high intakes of milk(!) and fats and oils had favorable effects on ten-year survivorship
>the proportion of energy from proteins and fats were significantly higher
https://nourishingtraditions.com/true-blue-zones-okinawa/
Frickin hell.
Either way, you can google whatever you want, meat will not increase your longevity, quite the opposite.
We can take massive population studies where one population lives to be 91 and the other lives to be 90 or we can take a look at individuals and the lifestyle decisions they make and the obvious results on them.
Agreed. I think they had this figured out decades ago. Eating lots of meat and dairy is just too much saturated fats. Clogs your arteries. I think way too much butter and cheese is the worst, but eating a steak every day is obviously not a good idea. Same goes for vegetable oils though. Main thing is stop frying everything.
Clearly, the healthiest way to eat is mostly steamed, boiled, and baked foods, with a little bit of red meat here and there to keep you vigorous. It's easy to tell for me. If I eat something that looks like pic related, my stomach just feels better, and if I eat like that for a while, my cardio is better. Ideal diet is eat boiled, steamed and baked plants and fish and then add in a little meat here and there.
I think the bad rep of unhealthy vegan people comes from people who are ethical vegans and don't know how to cook, so they just end up eating nothing but processed onions oil foods that happen to be vegan. Good vegan cooking + meat is healthy and delicious and makes your stomach feel good. Typical American cigs and butter and bacon diet gives you acid reflux and you feel like you're gonna die after running 5 km. Have you heard about this "couch to 5k" thing? Many Americans actually can't run 5k. That's fricking ridiculous. I haven't even broken a sweat after 5k.
Higher fat diets increase longevity. Higher carb diets increase mortality.
I guess if you want to be a cardiocel
>I haven't even broken a sweat after 5k.
Try breaking 5mins/km pace
Try searching for "Okinawa Pork Consumption" on your search engine of choice..
Oh oh
media:
>meat causes cancer!
reality (
):
>meat cures cancer
Is anyone else noticing what I am noticing?
Keto is just another million dollar interest fraud diet invented by roiding grifters. Eat your meats, eat your veggies. There are no life hacks, there are no magic improvements waiting to be unlocked, just learn to fricking live with not being some special existence.
That's a really stupid conspiracy theory. Nobody is trying to get us to eat lower profit margin foods. They want higher profits, not lower profits.
>CocaCola net profit margin as of June 30, 2023 is 23.92%.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/KO/cocacola/profit-margins
>JBS SA net profit margin as of June 30, 2023 is 0.32%.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/JBSAY/jbs-sa/profit-margins
Doctors promote keto/carnivore because it cures their patients.
>there is no money in pushing stupid diets to people online
have a nice day, moron.
I never said that. You can become fabulously wealthy promoting plant-based diets.
>vegans and vegetarians make millions off their fraud diets
>definitely not us ketotard grifters though, there's absolutely no money in it for us
You should genuinely have a nice day, I'm not joking. You're worthless.
Supporting the regime is profitable. Opposing the regime is self-destructive.
Some people are good, so they oppose the regime despite it harming their own finances and reputation.
You are evil. You support the regime.
See, like I said, a grifter. You're a psychopath feeding off the alienated, the gullible, the stupid, the paranoid and the uneducated. People like you should be rounded up and shot.
>i support the regime mass murdering dissenters
>dissenters are only pretending to disagree out of selfishness
Kek. Leftists are insane.
>suddenly being against keto and other grifter diets is supporting Biden and his support of Israel's genocide of Palestinians or someshit
Like I said, exploiting the paranoid and gullible. Your level of self-serving dishonesty is impossible for anyone capable of empathy.
How is telling people to eat steak and butter a grift? Any prescribed diet would be a grift with that logic.
>suddenly backpedals from schizo political shit about "the regime" to a moderate position of "I'm just telling people not to be vegetarions bro" that has nothing to do with anything said so far
You're far too dumb to make me fall for your bullshit.
I'm a different person and if you're too fricking moronic to take the slightest bit of criticism then you're probably wrong. What you say doesn't make any fricking sense.
All I've said is that keto is a grifter diet among many, and that grifters who exploit others with no concern for their health are psychopaths. To hat end, I've been arguing with one of those grifter's insane manipulations that htey use to target traditionally lucrative marks. If you can't even follow a simple conversation chain yet feel the need to interject in the middle of it, then do everyone a favour and shut up.
How is advocating for keto a grift any more than advocating for vegetarian or vegan diets? Unless someone is pushing a particular product then how are they making money?
Can you read, motherfricker?
>one grifter diet among many
And in what fricking world does one grifter diet being bad make another grifter diet good?
I'm disagreeing with your assertion that keto is a grift if you're too dull to tell that.
Yeah, by saying something as fricking moronic and dishonest as "how are vegan diets better" as if that has any fricking bearing whatsoever on whether or not keto is a pseudo-scientific grift that people make money off, you moronic psychopath loser.
Eat meat and animal fats. - Not a grift.
Eat Chad McDouchebro's Keto Cookies™ available here at chaddouchebro.com - Grift
Does this help you understand? Is telling people to eat food a conspiracy grift for the grocery stores? No, it's too generic.
>Eat meat and animal fats. - Not a grift
This message was brought to you by the American Association of Meat Processors.
https://www.aamp.com/
Okay, there are associations for every kind of industry and every kind of food producer in America. Eat kale. Eat vegetables. Eat legumes. They all have industries.
When someone wants to make money they advocate things which people with deep pockets want them to advocate.
E.g. plant-based, cico.
>cico deep pockets
homie what? It's a dietary principle, not a brand of food. Anyone who lasts over a year counting calories reverts to a low carb high protein diet anyway.
Cico is a lie promoted by the sugar industry. They spent enormous amounts of money on it over the past 70 years and still are.
Coca-Cola buys superbowl commercials to tell people about calories. Superbowl commercials are very expensive. The calorie con is extremely important to the sugar industry for the same reason the tobacco industry didn't want people to know smoking is harmful.
Oh boy this again. I don't know a single person who promotes cico and pushes sugar. Anyone who is on that knows sugar just spikes insulin making a cut near impossible. Oh and the soda giants? They're not telling you to eat less. Coca cola is not a calorie counting diet guru.
The American Diabetes Association promotes sugar consumption.
>corporation promotes eating more
Color me shocked. I'll get my food advice from them the same day I let scientologists be my therapist
The sort of marketing food conglomerates use to tell fatties they can eat a bit more? Again, not diet advice. It's a salesman trying to get you to buy more. Lowering fat intake is good for the average goybean oil huffing American, but anyone sticking to restricted calories would be told that protein should be excessive fats replacement
To summarize:
You can get diet advice from profiteering people paid by the sugar industry (cico, low-fat, plant-based) or you can get diet advice from counter-culture rebels who sacrifice their own reputation and financial wellbeing to tell the truth (keto, carnivore).
Cico doesn't need anyone to tell you how it works. It's self explanatory with some basic common knowledge or a tdee calculator. Eat less. It's the deathknell for every industry. Just consume less. Then it becomes just consume better ingredients, cook for yourself when you realize that every prepackaged and prepared meal you eat is full of empty trash that fails to satiate.
They can show control works, and encourage abandoning control for just one more in the same breath. The words of shysters means nothing.
Traditional belief is that certain foods (i.e. sweets) are fattening.
It took a major psyop to convince people of the calorie hoax. The psyop requires constant reinforcement. To this day companies like Coca-Cola are still funding calorie propaganda.
The existence and general processing of calories is not the hoax. Convincing the average weak willed cattle they can use their nonexistent willpower to eat constant sugary snacks and stay under maintenance is the scam. In fact I don't believe anyone who goes for sugar because they're "counting calories" has any fricking clue how much they eat in a day much less how much they should eat in the day.
Calories don't exist.
>math isn't real
You're actually moronic
The moron is you.
Neither do miles but we can still use them to calculate how long a journey will take.
>The words of shysters means nothing.
right, so they're incentivized to ignore more high-level strategies that bear in mind human tendencies and other metabolic factors
just because reducing calories works doesn't mean your thoughts should stop there
>reducing calories works
It doesn't.
Your chart that you spam endlessly literally shows that it does. Are you going to keep posting it hoping the people who call you out aren't in the next thread?
>when fatties stop counting calories and controlling their food intake because the TV show they were crash-dieting for ends, they regain weight
>when fatties atrophy their muscles through years of metabolic syndrome and lethargy and reduce their TDEE as a result it's the fault of math
>minus 800 kcal/day metabolic suprression?
>cico works!
But they weren't doing CICO - they stopped their disciplined dieting that helped them lose weight whilst filming for the show.
Unless you're asserting that the contestants successfully lost weight with CICO at first, and then gained weight despite still counting their calories properly.
Not my problem, I have a BMI of 25 whilst ~10% body fat and I've burned around 3200kcal so far today without even going to the gym.
Keep going with your low carb thing or whatever, I'm sure you'll be lean and healthy in another 6 months.
Post body.
What color is your adonis belt?
>no timestamp
Yawn.
Why bother? You'll just say the timestamp is shopped. You're btfo by my body and have nothing to show yourself. What kind of healthy body has your diet and lifestyle left you with?
Being physically active and omnivorous with a variety of carb sources and a basic understanding of food energy density and human biology has worked for me.
I didn't read this cope post. Everyone knows photos without timestamps are fake.
It would never occur to me to post a fake body to back up my argument because my body speaks for itself IRL which is where I normally discuss things like this with people. I'm not a terminally online maladjusted weirdo who attempts to wield interpersonal influence via proselytising for a dietary preference. I have no frame of reference for the mindset that would post fake pics, risking exposure as a fraud.
You don't get a timestamp, you get my scorn.
Just play devil's advocate for a moment and pretend that you believe that my picture is really me. What would that change? You'd still cling to your beliefs that being mindful of overall calories is useless or that carbs are evil or whatever it is you think you know.
Still didn't read. Still obviously a liar.
Real people can take timestamped photos faster than they can write all that cope.
>Real people can take timestamped photos faster than they can write all that cope.
You're right, so let's see what your amazing dietary protocol has done for you. Post body homosexual
>not taking a full body photo
Damn your diet must be a disaster.
See
Still waiting for yours.
Post body with timestamp.
I posted body, then I posted a timestamp. You can see I'm wearing the same triskel pendant in each picture. Stop obfuscating.
Post body and show us what your dietary protocol has achieved.
You didn't take a body pic because you look like shit as a result of your badly planned diet.
Whatever dude. I don't even hope to change your mind, but all the lurkers reading our exchange know you are afraid to show your body and I am not, because mine is better than yours, because my dietary protocols are not superstitious nonsense. Carbs are your friend.
You didn't take a body photo.
Taking the clavicle photo was as much effort as taking a body photo would have been. Obviously you're hiding your body because you fricked up big time with your shitty diet and you look like trash.
Enjoy your sweet and starchy treats, fatty.
>You didn't take a body photo
What's this?
Not what you look like, obviously.
Lmao I'll take that as a compliment. It's me, check the pendant, deal with it.
Dude everyone knows you look like shit because you took a zoomed in photo to hide your body. This is getting cringy. The more you post the more obvious your physique is trash.
Here is my body
Here is a timestamp of a closeup of the same body.
Anyone who isn't a delusional CARBS = GREAT SATAN moron or CHOLESTEROL = HEART DISEASE moron can tell that these two pictures are of the same body.
Rest assured, any third party reading our exchange is under no doubt that the mid-tier physique I posted is indeed mine. It is so self-evidently the same body that it's actually a little disarming that you are so assuredly trying to tell people that they cannot trust their own senses.
>Here is my body
>Here is a timestamp of a closeup of the same body.
Now post a timestamp of a non zoomed out/zoomed in version of your body that isn't obscured like you keep doing
You look like shit and you aren't fooling anyone.
Actually post your body not half a clavicle
>just because reducing calories works doesn't mean your thoughts should stop there
No shit. That's why I keep saying cico reverts to high protein low carb. Because that's what's sustainable. I swear no one actually reads shit here, it's just a pit of spergs waiting to erupt their elevator
pitch on whatever topics they care about.
The reason I promote cico as a start rather than straight to keto or keto lite is to make people understand WHY macros are important. To force them to think about what they shovel into their mouth and how frequently it happens. To really look at their vice foods and understand how they got so fat to begin with.
Then i want them to try to fit their junk foods in under calories and truly feel how empty those foods are. Failure and hunger must be their teacher if they are going to kick their bad habits for good. They must learn to love how cooking your own food puts you in control of your diet, your health, and your finances. They must appreciate how low quality processed foods really are.
I don't promote cico as a diet. It's the opposite in fact. Normies start and stop diets all the time. To them a diet ends and they're healthy forever. Doing calorie counting right is an awakening to just how rotten modern health and food is. You well never be able to unlearn that connection between quality foods like meat and vegetables and how you feel at rest. It is a process that necessarily must run into failures. Pushing past that will make a person ready for a good nutritional strategy. Not a diet, but a new lifestyle
>I swear no one actually reads shit here
I was clearly responding to the concept of "cico deep pockets" if you actually read
i'm not claiming to know your history of dietary recommendations
First advice to everyone should be: low-carb.
When the first advice is to focus on calories people do idiotic things like eating a low-fat diet.
It doesn't matter if they do "low carb" when those same goyslop junkies shovel down 1.5k calories of snacks because "that doesn't count".
Unlimited calorie low-carb works better than restricted calorie low-fat.
Telling people to think about calories at all is irresponsible.
>information is irresponsible
You are beyond helping
Lies are irresponsible.
The concept that calories are obesogenic is a lie.
It's not though. People don't run on magic, they run on chemical energy. Calories measure chemical energy, and when applied to digestible food we get the upper bounds of potential chemical energy. Given food we're meant to digest like meat, it's pretty damn accurate too with how efficiently we digestible it. Eat enough of anything and you will get fat. Simple as.
Calories have absolutely nothing to do with obesity. Case in point:
>same calories
>same macros
>literally identical feed
>different body composition
The difference is that one group ate powdered food. Powdered carbs cause an exaggerated hormonal response.
Fat cannot be created put of nothing. It is nothing more or less than a storage of chemical energy. You cannot create more energy just by making a food a powder
Yeah I've heard the calorietardation a million times. I'd like to skip that conversation tree, NPC.
Im sure you have heard it a milliom times.
Being so proudly wrong will get a lot of people to call you a dumbass
NTA but a powdered food vs a whole food is essentially predigested to a large degree. Did you ever do the experiment in high school chemistry where you test all the factors affecting a chemical reaction?
Other than heat, the other major one is surface area - when reagents have a larger surface area, there are more chances for collisions that result in the desired reaction.
Powdered (or liquid) calories require much, much less energy to digest than whole ones. It's not that new energy was created, but the rather that the body more efficiently absorbs one, resulting in a higher net energy gain.
Yeah, I was thinking about that. Makes me wonder what the control food was. If there's no other issue with the study (which there usually are), it would indicate the food source they're using is poorly digested in its original form, if there's that large a discrepancy. But this is also why I look at calories as an upper bound for energy. Complex or partially indigestible foods for us will pass through
The correct answer is: hormones.
You are using the word unlimited incorrectly. You mean unrestricted
>own reputation and financial wellbeing to tell the truth
I'm sure Tyson foods is suffering as well under the yoke of big plant.
Looks like they are suffering pretty bad actually, yeah. Negative profits. They are doing even worse than JBS SA.
>CocaCola net profit margin as of June 30, 2023 is 23.92%.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/KO/cocacola/profit-margins
>JBS SA net profit margin as of June 30, 2023 is 0.32%.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/JBSAY/jbs-sa/profit-margins
>Tyson Foods net profit margin as of September 30, 2023 is -1.23%.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/TSN/tyson-foods/profit-margins
CocaCola is doing great. They sell plant-based products.
what anon means is that cico is a good general guideline but 1 calorie consumed is not equals to 1 calorie burned as energy in your body. Some macros are processed better, some worse, some macros come out of your butthole, etc
>cico is a good general guideline
No it's actually harmful because it causes people to make poor choices, like eating low-fat foods. Belief in cico causes obesity.
Yep, there is some variance but it's good to deal with upper bounds. Really what in saying is it's a jumping off point for understanding how different types of food influence your hormones when calories are similar. Everyone has different tolerances for those hormones but it will always revert to high protein low carb because that's what feels full and healthy. Numbers oriented spergs like me work well on cico because it makes sense of how each type of fuel affects me. Used to have a rampant sweet tooth, now the candy aisle revolts me. Cheap fried foods smell kinda rancid.
tbf junk food manufacturers, which do have deep pockets, are incentivized to prove that controlling for calories does work
No one sold keto to me I just read a few dozen studies online that showed positive outcomes and tried it for myself.
I watched conferences where doctors would present the results they got in their patients doing keto. Real life results are extremely convincing.
>I-I'm not a leftist
>I just want to round up and shoot everyone who disagrees with the Narrative
>B-because it's all dangerous cOnSpiRaCy tHeOrY stuff
>I'm the empathetic one, guys!!!!
Lmao, you worthless, moronic trash.
Get off this site and never come back you dumb homosexual
Look at you taking down big broccoli by buying beef lol
Good thing shawn sells meat!
t. purdue investor
Guess what? Some company somewhere is going to make junk food for any idea for fat lazy people that don't know any better and don't care. I wouldn't sit here for one minute and pretend someone that cooks meals with legumes and all different kinds of vegetables to hit a variety of amino acids is deserving of the same level of respect as this shit. There is nuance.
Vegans be like
>all those studies I've seen on mtor and 'iron excess' prove that Michael Greger is far healthier than Ted Naiman.
>muscles = health
lol
Thank you for proving that post is correct.
the older you get the more true that actually is
>healthy hormone levels = healthy
Yes
would it make sense to compare a vegan athlete or powerlifter with your average fat american who eats burgers and steak
moronic comparison
>vegan doctor vs omnivore doctor
What's wrong with the comparison?
Why do all the pro meat MDs sell supplements
Some people like supplements.
Sorry I'm not into paganism. Also this contradicts verses in the Tanakh but of course you dont actually read the bible
Nobody cares.
Then why did you post it?
>same tired old meme
>still using the word unlimited incorrectly
k
This graph is hilarious. I can't wait until you learn about how ice cream sales affects murder.
I can see Dr. Greger's low-protein diet is really paying off.
he's a pedophile for sure
you can just tell
Time for dinner, I don't have any more time to argue with your moronic grifter ass, so I'll leave you with these parting words: you're subhuman scum and not half as clever as you think.
Price, and the 'cyte will haunt you forever posting the same 3 disinfo pics
Reminder that glucose oxidation yields more ATP and CO2, requires less oxygen, and produces fewer ROS than beta-oxidation. Burning fatty acids for energy should only occur at rest or during periods of starvation.
If what you were posting was true and you were comfortable and convinced of your statement, your endless threads and propaganda wouldn't be needed
>taking advice from a diabetic guy with low test
Idk what this is about but the end result is 100% accurate. The peas and oils bloat me fricking hard and I get gassy as all frick and feel sick after. Never eating them again
sketch about IST's diet schizos
lost
i love boomer humor
baste
t. boomer
Anyone that quotes this "study" as proof that eating meat is a low-iq mongoloid. You could use exactly the same argument in the 1970s to "prove" that smoking cigarettes was actually healthy (big tobacco actually did) because eating meat is associated with higher life expectancy. No shit that you'll live longer than a malnourished indian vegetarian, even if you're an obese sedentary ameritard.
>You could use exactly the same argument in the 1970s to "prove" that smoking cigarettes was actually healthy (big tobacco actually did)
Prove it.
Its one guy who posts the same shawn baker image and makes the same thread topics and response images. He calls people vegan leftists when they call him out. He's done this for the past week at least. You can tell by the mannerisms he uses
If you think about it meat human does contain all the vitamins needed to survive.
Hey bro I totally believe this is a 100% legit photo.
Can you just tell me what vegan social media you took it from? Because it is so legit I just want to find the source.
Vegan logo is in the top left of pic related.
baker liiterally adressed the pic on his twitter and gave a bs explenation while he obviously abuses steroids, yet you claim the pic is fake because a vegan used it on tiktok. you believe him when he claims natty but say he's lying when he confirms his dyel "just on a cut" form?
Yeah bro we both agree it's a totally real 100% verified legit photo.
So why are you hiding the source?
source is twitter, instagram, zoom
Okay bro just give a link directly to the photo.
It's not a fake photo so it will be no problem, right?
search his twitter for his replay, carnicucks can't be this moronic, right?
Shawn Baker replied to the photo made by vegans. He never posted the original.
Just show the source. It's a real photo, right? Source it.
Real photos can be sourced.
moron
I totally believe you're posting real photos which is why I ask for a source.
Real photos have sources. Since it is a real photo it has a source which you can certainly provide.
i used to think these pics were real but this looks obviously shopped. whyes his right forearm look so much bigger?
why is his left arm blurring like that?
Yeah no shit they are photoshopped. If they were real they would have archive.is links in the image and everything just to make sure Shawn Baker didn't delete it or try to cover it up.
Just ask for source when they are posted. Nobody ever posts source because they are fake.
There's even a vegan logo on this one:
https://twitter.com/SBakerMD/status/1616948047774380032
>b-but his twitter got hacked sur-ACK
that's not the same pic as this
The point is, he was looking like a cancer patient when he didn't blast steroids for a few months. hes a fake natty pos like liver king.
>I photoshoped a pic to make a point
Your behaviour is proof more than anything that they are fake.
You behave like a person who consciously and deliberately is posting fake photos.
its time to take your meds bro, you got BTFO
have fun with non existent testosterone levels, unless you are a roidtroony.
You probably didn't even actually watch that full episode but it was actually a good episode
so what was the conclusion according to you?
Vegetable police is now carnivore again and is getting results
His skin is still dumping oxalates still and he is blaming meat again
What are we supposed to get from this?
?t=1001
On carnivore for a year
Stopped coffee and tea 3 weeks ago, now my sweat doesn`t smell
I noticed that if I drink coffee, my sweat gets that typical sticky part of the odor
I also quit coffee recently. I miss having hot drinks though. I have tried bone broth which is nice but way too expensive. I might start drinking plain hot water.
when I used to get colds before my keto year (that I did without knowing), I used to drink hot water and eat some ginger to heal my throat, hot water was kinda nice
I do miss hot drinks but hot water is not appealing anymore
dunno what effect it would ginger tea have on me nowadays
Helps with digestion but you're right it needs flavor. Even just a lemon is bretty good
Here are some more plant-based companies:
>General Mills net profit margin as of August 31, 2023 is 12.07%.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GIS/general-mills/profit-margins
>Kellanova net profit margin as of September 30, 2023 is 5.21%.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/K/kellanova/profit-margins
>PepsiCo net profit margin as of September 30, 2023 is 9.05%.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PEP/pepsico/profit-margins
No wonder there is such a strong top-down attack against meat, eggs, and dairy. Every megacorporation wants to sell plants so they can get big profits.
vegans will do the veganuary in january where they practice farting and starvation to protest against the carnivore month movement
this dude strikes me a s light version of liver king
to claim naty as a influencer you need to provide blood work that can be verified
>to claim naty as a influencer you need to provide blood work that can be verified
Well he's done bloodwork. Certain stuff anyway. He is diabetic and his test is down the drain.
When someone looks natty and their lifts are natty why would you need any additional proof that they are natty?
Because they've lost their license for lying and because they sell the product they tell you is all you need to eat to live healthfully
Oh you're just a vegan liar who is using slander to try and suppress pro-meat information.
That's exactly why people try to call Shawn Baker not natty. Always a vegan liar. Never any credible people making that accusation.
Nothing he said was wrong
Everything he said was a lie.
Whatever you say
It's astounding to me how dishonest leftists are. They will tell the most easily disproven lies over and over again, despite being proven wrong. Even when they know they will be proven wrong again.
You haven't pointed out what lie he supposedly said. All you did was seethe uncontrollably this entire thread
Why should water treatment plants need to undergo audits. They seem like credible people. I'm sure its clean.
he did, and his testosterone leveles are in the toilet.
His testosterone has gone up on carnivore. Which happens to everyone who does carnivore.
But blood tests are irrelevant anyway. Mic the Vegan is effeminate despite having a large number on paper that people associate with masculinity.
dude on the right has a way better face. Face is king in terms of health. Just tell him to stop being a gay. But yea this is why you women choose face first bc its the best indidactor or health.
k
baker is on steroids and the carnivore diet lowers your testosterone, one of the ex carnivore grifters Saladino admitted to it on more plates more dates.
Baker is lifetime natty.
Keto/carnivore raises testosterone.
>Keto/carnivore raises testosterone.
Then why is his test in the tank
Testosterone fluctuates during the day
Try testing it after your work out to see what happens
His testosterone went up on carnivore. From 237 (
) as vegans like to post, to 425 (
).
Almost double the testosterone just by going carnivore? Hell yeah!
So which is it?
>test went up
>test doesn't matter
You're a dishonest vegan either way. You're a despicably bad person.
You haven't answered the question and dodged the whole time. Talk about dishonesty anon.
you can use the youtube's search tool directly on shawn's channel, there is a video about testosterone from 5 years ago addressing the vegans accusations
basically the numbers are meaningless if you are really healthy because what counts is efficiency and receptors sensitivity
also, the numbers fluctuate depending on what you do in your day
ferrigno freedom is a nice anecdotal about getting out of TRT after going carnivore
So which is it
It makes healthily normal depending on your receptors sensitivity
If you need more testosterone, the carnivore diet raises it
add
Basically makes enough for males be males and females be females
No more men boobs or bearded women
so baker is a genetic freak because he has so good receptors he can be 230 lbs with a six pack with 250-400 toilet tier testosterone or a lying pos roidtroony who claims natty, eather way it just proves carnivore is bad for testosterone levels if you are not es "blessed" as roidy baker.
>b-but his testosterone doubled on carnivore WOHA and he's lifetime natty
250-400 is just average hormon fluctuation plus mpmd is a roidtroony on trt and has 400 on his trt blood test.
He explain the license problem on the last Joe Rogan posdcast in the first few minutes
Isn't that the pedophile known as Shawn Baker?
sauce?
I haven't eaten meat in over a decade, been doing great in athletics the whole time
Post body.
Just think about what humans ate for most of our pre agricultural history. What food was simply most available for humans to eat? Do you suppose humans ate primarily wild growing fruits? Try going for a hike and living on wildly growing fruits and mushrooms and seeing how long you can survive. Compare the scarcity of pre-agriculture plant foods to the hyper abundance provided by mammoths.
Humans are animals and for all animals the optimal diet is one that is prescribed by nature. For humans that is one of primarily meat.
Dogs can ingest plant foods but by nature dogs are carnivorous. The same can be said by humans.
Grains are human petfood. There is a reason why pre-agriculture humans were stronger, healthier and smarter than post-agriculture humanity.
Meat is useful to grow and build muscle, in that sense it was useful for early humans to strive. But meat does not increase longevity. In fact this argument of our ancestors is nonsensical, because all humans had to do was reproduce, which they usually were able to do before 30.
Everything that happens after reproduction is irrelevant for evolution.
sugar shills exposed
carnivore wins once again
I don't take advice from people who worship the "PEDOPHILE Shawn Baker".