>need 1g/kg protein per day just to maintain muscle mass

>need 1g/kg protein per day just to maintain muscle mass
>farmers throughout history did intense physical work while eating mostly carb slop and had meat only on holidays
??

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

The Kind of Tired That Sleep Won’t Fix Shirt $21.68

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    They worked in the sun which aids testosterone production. They also didn't have secular humanist chemicals in every product.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I am not talking about test levels, I am saying that they did manual work that most people would be incapable of doing today on diet insufficent in protein

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >secular humanist chemicals
      can christcucks stop acting as intellectuals applying labels they don't understand to everything you're supposed to stand (LARP) against?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Spotted the ~~*secular humanist*~~

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        shalom fellow secular humanist

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        You're right they should call ZOG for what it is anon.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    are you moronic

    Nutrition Facts
    Serving Size 100 g
    Amount Per Serving
    Calories
    339
    % Daily Values*
    Total Fat2.47g3%
    Saturated Fat0.454g2%
    Trans Fat-
    Polyunsaturated Fat0.978g
    Monounsaturated Fat0.344g
    Cholesterol0mg0%
    Sodium2mg0%
    Total Carbohydrate71.13g26%
    Dietary Fiber-
    Sugars-
    Protein13.68g

    so 13.68g per 339 calories, an agricultural laborer could burn as much as 3390 calories which means 136.8g of protein, even if they were a 300 lb body builder they'd be maintaining their muscle mass on this diet

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Body builders need around 1.8g/kg of protein, on the top end.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        then they are the equivalent of a 170 lb athlete, which I suppose is what you would expect, sinewy well developed hard muscle

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Farmers (in "organized societies") make a blip of one percent of our history. They were just slaves fully expected to die young and be replaced by their offspring forced to work as soon is they could walk. Press F but move along; we are not genetically predisposed to be the slaves or anything like that.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      what about black people, they always ended up as slaves through history whenever they made contact with another race, except the other archaic hominids of africa like pygmies and khoisan of course

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      If that's true, then we've always had enough more than enough to eat and everything else was always about control

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Absolutely not. Every time we have more than enough to eat, we make more people until we no longer have enough to eat.

    • 2 months ago
      DoctorGreen

      >Farmers (in "organized societies") make a blip of one percent of our history. They were just slaves fully expected to die young and be replaced by their offspring forced to work as soon is they could walk. Press F but move along; we are not genetically predisposed to be the slaves or anything like that

      If that's true, then we've always had enough more than enough to eat and everything else was always about control

      >If that's true, then we've always had enough more than enough to eat and everything else was always about control

      Absolutely not. Every time we have more than enough to eat, we make more people until we no longer have enough to eat.

      >Absolutely not. Every time we have more than enough to eat, we make more people until we no longer have enough to eat.
      interesting

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        We have an archeological site in Poland (it's Biskupin) from about 600 BC and these people supposedly had much better diet than the common people from about 1500 AD. They had fish (you only have these villages near some water sources..), bread, eggs, poultry, cheese, vegetables like carrots and onions, fruit, mushrooms, berries, honey - basically a modern grocery store diet.
        We had an extremely short period in history when strong states were able to force people to produce mostly grains because it was suitable for long storage and trade (and taxes) but no farmer with any degree of freedom would do just that - and subsist on just grains. Look at what people grow in their small backyard gardens _now_; it will be some poultry, some vegies, fruits, nuts. Just healthy, nutritious food.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          cont. btw, grains used to have a similar role that a sugar cane (or cotton) had in Northern American slavery. Don't draw any conclusions about the diet of slaves from this - and particularly not about a _proper_ human diet.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >carb slop
    low IQ moron detected

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Farmers were, for the most part, not ripped bodybuilder giga chads.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The soil had more nutrients than our depleted soil today

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    On all accounts, they degenerated physically and neoteny with some peramorphic features especially in males being selected for. Likely that many of these changes led to enhanced longevity and all sorts of changes to our morphology, thus "modernizing" us. Plus they were using tools and lived a far more sedentary, less physically demanding lifestyle than hunters or herders.

    If they were getting some 50-60 grams of protein per day, the degeneration and wasting wouldn't seem so immediately obvious. Likely bones and marrow, joints, fish bones and the like were included in soups and stews in order to make meals with complete proteins as is common in many cultures. Vegetarians use a similar strategy by combining beans and rice to complement each other, or an egg with most any food, etc.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I really have suspicions about this common narrative I hear about how scarce meat was for people that historians are always saying now. Nobody ever seems to cite a primary account of people's lives. The few old travel accounts I've read from 19th century travelers never seems to line up with that either.
    I'm going to post a few examples that I remember reading but will look for more in the future.

    First up here is some excerpts on Northern China from French missionaries.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Anatolia 1890
      Armenians

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Turkish peasants

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

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

        Turkish peasants

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

        Russian peasant near Perm, Siberia, 1914

        https://i.imgur.com/1JzzMTR.png

        Well we did trade our sense of community, a healthy work life balance and general happiness for.. Well they were.. We're now.. At least.. I..

        • 2 months ago
          sage

          democracy..??

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Is there a return policy on this trade "deal"?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You're right dude.

      It's all speculation based on estimates derived from archaeological finds.

      But those finds only represent a tiny fraction of what used to exist, and are subject to "survivorship bias" (look that up).

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >need 1g/kg protein per day just to maintain muscle mass
    hwat?

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Farmers were largely weak manlets. Pastoralists are taller and stronger.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Execpt its not ?
      Dont know about the strenght thing
      But on height many pastoralists were short as frick (turks, mongols, arabs etc...)
      You just repeating memes on something you dont know about you historylet

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >turks, mongols, arabs etc...
        Because they are genetically small, they are still taller and stronger than genetically similar farmers

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The diet of the medieval peasant was primarily the three b’s, bread beer and bacon. Pigs were commonly kept and slaughtered to make into salt pork which could last a long time. Nevermind the fact that they all kept chickens and while they didn’t often eat them except for special occasions, they did have in general good access to eggs. Moreover, in a lot of places the hunting of small game with blunted arrows was allowed. You could take small birds, squirrels and rabbits with a blunt arrow. You were only considered to be poaching if you were caught with a sharp arrow, the presumption being that you were stealing muh kings deer.

    Even then plenty people did hunt venison and both are and sold it to other commoners.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Russian peasant near Perm, Siberia, 1914

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous
  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    One place where I read about meat restricted diet is Greece and Constantinople, but that seemed to be a choice of religious devotion and not lack of availability.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Even then, there still seemed to be a lot of protein rich seafood and snails involved in meals.
      from 1799

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Good evidence. To be frank you are right to be a bit suspicious of the pseudohistorical claims of 'nobody ate meat'. I know it is tin foil hat for me to say but given we see the duplicitous practice elswhere it stands to reason there is the anti-meat/pro-vegetarian agenda behind some of the claims. Not as some organized conspiracy but rather people who want to advocate for it suggesting modern meat-consumption is an abberation. In sheer volume (think of how many chickens we'll eat the wings of) and in pickiness of parts, sure, but not in actual consumption of it. At least pig and various fowl or game, it was plenty common just as impoverished africans can regularly eat bush meat.

        The one thing that does seem consistent is beef was not regularly eaten. In ancient Greece I vaguely recall it only being used for communal sacrifice, every time I read about some african pastoral tribe they love their cows more than their women and only use their milk and blood (mongol style with horses IE not killing the cow) and never want to kill the cow. I know the English eventually got the rosbif association, but I'd be curious about the history of beef consumption and when it really took off.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          its all going to be animal specific. pigs can deliver 20 or more piglets a year, while sheep can deliver 1-3. chickens take almost 4 months to grow to adult size but you might get half a dozen in one clutch. rabbits are excellent.

          markets would have been a big drain on access to protein. my grandparents and before them, rarely ate eggs despite having lots of chickens because they would all go to market so they could buy flour and other goods, and that has been the norm for centuries. Its why people eat pigs feet, chicken feet etc... its not bc thats all they can afford but because the rest of the carcass can be sold at market for money, which can buy more calories in the form of grains (usually)

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            So they actually couldnt afford it, they had to trade more expansive chicken calories for grain calories

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >meat on holidays

    Lazy revisionist pseudohistory. Anywhere coastal had access to seafood for most of the year, even the lowest farmer kept pigs and chickens, and in most areas, the only limit to the amount of pasture available was how far one wished to travel from a city.

    Prior to post-Renaissance population densities, you'll only find exceptions to this general abundance in metropolises like Rome.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Even in those Roman metropolises it's not as if their fast food (Thermo whatever they're called) were only serving vegetarian dishes. Sausages are easy as shit to make, as is various offal if it's from pigs and whatever. It's kind of comical for the revisionist hacks to suggest that meat was rare and a treat (I fricking hate when people suggest making meat 'a treat') when Catholicism had to constantly cajole and badger people about no meat on fridays or on lent. If meat was so damn rare then they'd not have to bother combatting pilpul loopholes ( https://themediaevalmonk.wordpress.com/2020/05/16/eating-meat-how-medieval-monks-found-loopholes-concerning-their-diets/ ) regarding whether a beaver was a fish or meat.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I can't find primary sources because search engines don't fricking work anymore unless you want psyop-of-the-day slop, but even Wikipedia isn't coy about this. Mass production and export of preserved fish was the lifeblood of several European cities in the Middle Ages.

      "The principal export traded from Bergen was dried cod from the northern Norwegian coast, which started around 1100. Stockfish was the main reason that the city became one of North Europe's largest centres for trade."

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >Prior to post-Renaissance population densities, you'll only find exceptions to this general abundance in metropolises like Rome.
    urbitas est infernus

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Russian peasants, 1816
    Again, meat only seems absent during religious fasts.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why do you think so many farming cultures were so short? Being smaller means your body needs less resources.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Other way around moron
      Like i said many pastoralists are short as frick too

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Farmers were short, malnourished and subhuman. They were strong for their size sure, but not anything special. This was achieved by slave labour working their thin muscles. Even with subpar nutrition you will gain strength.

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >need 1g/kg protein per day just to maintain muscle mass

    if you're the average modern person
    a b***h, in so many words

    retvrn

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    They are fish dumbass.

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    They didnt had only meat on holydays you moronic idiot
    They also ate eggs, dairy, vegetable protein and cheese

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    you do not actually need that much protein. it has been observed that as* muscle mass increases, the protein intake required to maintain* the muscle is less than is needed to build* it.

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