Keto is the emergency mode for the body, not the optimal diet. This is when your body is using everything to keep the fire going, fat is used as the primary source now instead of carbs. Muscle mass declines, skin and hair becomes more brittle, eyes more sunken, teeth and gums more brittle, all around just more lean. You're not biologically expected to this like this for the rest of your life, a few weeks maybe a few months if possible or until you find more fuel (carbs, protein and fat).
If my car has run-on-flat tires and it can go another 50 miles before they are completely flat and my car can't go anymore, it's not optimal to drive on them for any longer than I have to.
Same goes with veganism, people who just eat plants suffer the same effects because they are limiting their diet and the body doesn't like that.
>except you can live into your 90s eating no plants or carbs at all
I can theoretically drive on spokes, doesn't mean it's good. Some people are born with cars that run on metal spokes altogether and the climate they live in allows that adaptation to prosper.
It's harder to do in modern society thanks to big pharma pumping you full of vaccines and making you moronic, but if you manage to fight against the public schooling and go against your teachings, you can find that things work differently in reality.
?si=BY132yLdiCocHeVa
4 months ago
Anonymous
>cant post an example, and posts cope instead
I know alcoholics that live to their 80s thats not an achievement. Carnivore along with all other meme diets are gay
4 months ago
Anonymous
I'm not clicking the link but if that's the rancher that shawn baker shills then she eats "meat based" she isnt carnivore
It's actually the opposite, keto (fat burning) is the default metabolism. Your body values what it spares, in other words, whatever it uses up first is what is less important. It'll want to use up alcohol first, carbs second, and then fat. Think of it another way, if you were to fast your body would use up the least important things first like alcohol, then carbs, then fat, and then protein. This isn't exactly the case as if there's defective cells it will use up that for protein needs but we're talking moreso in terms of fuel. Furthermore, fat and protein are the building blocks as well as fuel sources (with protein rarely being used as fuel and fat being preferentially used as fuel), while carbs are purely a source of fuel, it cannot be used for anything else which is why fat and protein are required and carbs are not, the body in the absence of carbs will switch to a fat metabolism and create any carbs it needs given the demands. To say that muscle mass would decline, skin and hair become brittle, and so on, is just wrong, all that requires is fat and protein and whatever carbs are needed will be made according to the demands.
gut microbiome can take a few months to adapt to diet changes. Probably related to this I suspect. It's also why keto diarrhea happens. But it doesn't happen at all if you ease into it
4 months ago
Anonymous
It's not gut microbiome. The stomach can process meat just fine. The symptoms described are likely the result of hypothyroidism caused by type 3 diabetes. The body's ability to synthesize endogenous carbs are impacted by insulin resistance and it takes time to heal. Very low but not no carb is required. This is a trait of disease and will eventually go away as the body adapts to clean eating again
4 months ago
Anonymous
And then, if you accidently revert back to eating carbs, your body goes fricking haywire and you feel like you have the flu for like 2 weeks. Very low reward, high risk diet. Maybe if I was huddled around a fire eating a dead caribou for 3 days I wouldn't mind but times have changed.
4 months ago
Anonymous
The same logic applies to if someone "reverts" to eating fat, point is your body will adapt best it can to whatever diet you're eating so anything relatively new will make it go haywire.
If we're talking about anecdotes then I don't know, you could pull up someone on "keto" where that happens and I can find someone on "keto" where that doesn't happen, ultimately we don't know if they're actually on keto.
gut microbiome can take a few months to adapt to diet changes. Probably related to this I suspect. It's also why keto diarrhea happens. But it doesn't happen at all if you ease into it
What this anon says could also be true, if someone's switching to a keto diet when their body is adapted to carb burning it will need to upregulate whatever it needs to start digesting and burning fat and making carbs according to the body's demands. The gut microbiome will need to adapt to the new diet as well. Any diet a person changes to will make the person get worse before they get better because the body needs to adapt to it, barring exceptions like if they were eating so bad that anything would improve their situation or if they were starving
With all this in mind, should I eat more fats? My diet is roughly 40% protein, 40% carb, 20% fat. My goal is fat loss, but I also lift 4x per week so I want energy to do so. Never tried keto before.
>Think of it another way, if you were to fast your body would use up the least important things first like alcohol, then carbs, then fat, and then protein.
That's not what happens though
It's harder to do in modern society thanks to big pharma pumping you full of vaccines and making you moronic, but if you manage to fight against the public schooling and go against your teachings, you can find that things work differently in reality.
?si=BY132yLdiCocHeVa
>You won't believe her age
She looks old as shit. You are as stupid as a woman.
Keto is the emergency mode for the body, not the optimal diet. This is when your body is using everything to keep the fire going, fat is used as the primary source now instead of carbs. Muscle mass declines, skin and hair becomes more brittle, eyes more sunken, teeth and gums more brittle, all around just more lean. You're not biologically expected to this like this for the rest of your life, a few weeks maybe a few months if possible or until you find more fuel (carbs, protein and fat).
If my car has run-on-flat tires and it can go another 50 miles before they are completely flat and my car can't go anymore, it's not optimal to drive on them for any longer than I have to.
Same goes with veganism, people who just eat plants suffer the same effects because they are limiting their diet and the body doesn't like that.
Where did our ancestors get coca cola and cheetos? Surely there are records of ancestral corn syrup if it's our optimal diet
Okay, so humans having the stomach acidity of a scavenger is proof that we were scavengers of carcasses before we became hunters. What's your point? At what point do you argue we share a common ancestor with plants? It's irrelevant
4 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah, yeah, whatever
I don't care about soience, what I care about is that Chris Bumstead eats carbs.
>Why would we need tools if a plant domesticated us
Why not? If you can do something good for yourself why not do it? If you can eat some grain with your meat and have no foul reaction from it, go ahead and farm it. It's variation in diet, the body learns and likes novelty in all things from fitness to diet.
Agriculture wasn't a thing before we learned to use tools. Tools allowed us to also farm. Why would we need to develop tools to pick fruit? Monkeys don't use tools
Humans lost a few bones and joints in the hands to allow for more dexterity which resulted in weaker grip strength but we're still stronger than chimps for example.
They're pound for pound about 10-20% stronger than us but we're larger. If you compare lifting strength humans are a lot stronger than chimps but we get grip strength mogged.
Humans are the omnivore-est ape that's ever existed.
Unlike most of the other great apes (that have survived now) we didn't evolve for a jungle environment. We evolved in a bit of africa that was dominated by lakes, savannah, cliffs and the sea.
We evolved to migrate from place to place and gather food from multiple different and distinct sources. That means we generalized to an insane degree.
Chimps, gorillas, orangutans, even lesser apes like gibbons all evolved to climb trees and eat stuff you find in the jungle. >humans are not as specialised as chimps for climbing, but we are adequate enough to gather food
Tree/cliff food (fruit, honey) >human fingers go pruney when submerged in water, giving them a better grip for searching along shorelines and underwater. The only other primate this happens to is the Japanese Macaque (the hot spring monkeys)
Shoreline food (Shellfish/crustaceans) >humans are able to travel long-distance, other primates can't
Seasonal food potentially hundreds of miles away (different berries/plants) >when humans walk/run our heads don't move around. Our bodies concertina around our skull so we can focus our eyes on a point and sprint towards it. We are the only primate species (including neanderthals and homosexual erectus) to do this
Aids in hunting small game >we are the only primate that can throw objects with enough force to seriously wound at more than 30 ft
Chimps are crack shots when flinging shit at chinese zoo tourists but they can't actually throw a rock hard enough to hurt something unless it's in spitting distance
This is all stuff we evolved to be able to do before you even consider tools and shit.
A chimp can tear your arm out of its socket but you can literally cave its skull in with a fist-sized rock provided you don't throw like a woman.
TL;DR primates are cool as frick but they can only survive in the jungle, we environment-mog the frick out of ALL of them
A lot of our "hunting skills" were already in place before we developed the idea to sharpen a stick and throw it at a deer or an elephant. homosexual sapiens, neanderthals and homosexual erectus all hunted small game and collected shellfish before any of us became developed enough to hunt the big game species.
Thia is why we almost universally wiped the largest, least populus herbivore species out within 200,000 years of arriving in an area. Stuff like mammoths, hippos and giant elk were all low-population widespread species across europe and siberia that we hunted to extinction. Deer and horses and shit bred more frequently and matured more quickly, so their populations survived us arriving.
>That means we generalized to an insane degree.
This is what all these moronic arguments ignore, that humans are adept at adaptation. Much like pigs, our 'optimal' food is basically any old shit.
It's always blah blah muh hunter gathers, but the diet between a hunter gatherer in northern europe vs southern south america would be quite different
>lesser strength
any great ape would rip you to shreds if they wanted to. >greater dexterity
they cannot run, jog or walk as effectively as we do. we also have more efficient hands. >greater constitution
the ability to sweat is one of the most broken things about humanity. >greater intelligence
the ability to make and interpret symbols is broken >greater wisdom
the ability to conject and philosophize is broken >greater charisma
the ability to manipulate others without overt force is broken
I do carnivore with honey, milk, and some fruit juice. It works for me. All that matters is results.
a walnut tree can feed 50 humans alone with the calories it yields wtf are you talking about
you can literally brain afk chill under a walnut tree the entire fall and you won't have any problems except for acne
Try eating nothing but nuts for a month and report back.
So you eat protein, probably fat, glucose, fructose, and galactose (aka glucose). If you are lean now, and eating appreciable amount of fat, it's gonna catch up in a few years, and you'll become fat, I guarantee it because that's what I did and that's what happened to me. Now I dropped most of the fat from the diet, and am slowly losing fat and gaining strength.
I'm in my 30s and I was always skelly until I started eating this diet. I now have some muscle and basically no fat. I couldn't get fat if I tried; it's not a concern.
Also, it's fine to have some fat on you as long as it's healthy fat from healthy foods (aka saturated fat). Fat protects your body from toxins. Landwhales who eat seed oils are the ones who are fricking up their bodies.
I don't define myself by my diet because I'm not a moron. Call it animal-based if you want; the label is irrelevant. I eat mostly beef and raw milk with some honey, raw butter, and occasional fruit juice.
>I don't define myself by my diet
Good think literally zero people said you did > I eat mostly beef and raw milk with some honey, raw butter, and occasional fruit juice.
OK cool, so not carnivore
I don't understand how this is supposed to trigger lifters. We eat fat and protein for muscle fuel and then carbs on top of it on account of the high energy demands of muscular synthesis and maintenance.
Just because you've chosen to learn nothing in the time you've had on this Earth doesn't mean everyone else is as pathetic as you are. If you've nothing to contribute to the discussion then go do some research and come back instead of trying to insult people for being better than you.
Elephants and hippos are megafauna. Elephants are 8.5% fat. Hippos are probably even leaner. Polar bears and mammoths are fat but that's not where humans evolved.
Btw dietary protein, when liver is not full of glycogen, is mostly converted into glycogen immediately (it makes several passes in the bloodstream, going through the liver every pass, iirc 25% gets converted every pass, every pass lasts several minutes).
Nuts are seasonal and have a very low yield, especially in the wild, to be a staple. Organs are low fat, unless it's brains. Elephant brain is 5kg, Horse brain is 600g.
Fish idk about, but I suspect most oily fishes are saltwater, and freshwater fish is rarely fatty, and if it is, it's also seasonal, regional or rare.
a walnut tree can feed 50 humans alone with the calories it yields wtf are you talking about
you can literally brain afk chill under a walnut tree the entire fall and you won't have any problems except for acne
I live in a mountaneous country with a walnut tree in every yard, people predominantly use walnuts for sweets or crushed, for sauces. Bread is a staple here.
Modern humans are by far the most sick, deprived and stunted humanoids have ever been. Humanity is in a fallen state.
Yeah I'm sure my 6'1 ass is stunted compared to a sentinelese.
I'm all for eating bone marrow over lard/butter/veg oil but you don't get that much marrow out of a single cow, I'm saying that as someone who buys marrow bones for marrow. Like, it's enough for a single person for a week, but no way it could be a significant kcal contribution for a 30 people tribe unless you're killing an animal a day, even then idk.
All of those hunting skills were for picking fruit, obviously.
Hunting skills are for hunting stop larping as le epic carnivore. Humans ate a combo diet. Grains are fine. Humans need glucose, glucose is protein sparing, protein is turned into glucose when there's not enough of it. Dietary fat, as a macronutrient, is only useful to make plant compounds like curcumin or quercetin bioavailable. As a source of energy, it's only useful for a couple of organs. Muscles run on glucose. Brain runs on glucose. Testes run on glucose. Eating massive amounts of fatty meat or butter is moronic. Eating organ meats or marrow, yeah, great. Eating grains, great. Eating pure sugar, not great.
Humans are carnivore though, according to our digestive tract. It's most similar to canines. Any plant stuff a paleo human consumed was out of desperation. The animal products are always prioritized. And how are grains good but sugar bad? Grain is worse than pure sugar.
Sugar = fructose + glucose. Glucose = good, rapidly absorbed into muscle and liver, raises metabolism, there's a pathway that shuttles glucose to muscles (if they're glycogen-depleted) without raising insulin.
Fructose = bad, doesn't get used by muscles, only used to top up liver glycogen, hangs out in the bloodstream and causes inflammation, gradually turns into fat.
Grain = starch = pure slow glucose = good. Replace grains with potatos or buckwheat, I don't care.
Canines are omnivores. You can subsist on pure carni if you want, but most of the protein you eat will be turned into glucose.
Nope, canines and humans are facultative carnivores. Both need to eat mostly a variety of animal tissues to maintain optimal health and cannot handle fiber. Plant stuff is just filler you can eat if your desperate. Every single animal is an omnivore using your logic.
>most of the protein you eat will be turned into glucose
I think this is wrong, but this isn't expert opinion, just what makes sense to me. Protein isn't used as fuel, either carbs or fat are used as fuel, protein is only used in fuel when carbs and fat are used up, and when the body converts to a fat burning metabolism it'll use fats where it can and make carbs from fat according to the demands. In my n=1 experience, I never felt my "energy" needs satiated by eating protein, when I feel like I need energy and I tune into what my body wants it is craving fats and/carbs, not protein. It wouldn't make sense either that excess protein would be converted into glucose given how important protein is and how much the body doesn't want to us it as fuel, and the making of carbs is demand driven, it's not made just because there's an excess of fat or protein (if you're in keto).
4 months ago
Anonymous
>and make carbs from fat according to the demands
Read into beta oxidation glucose production from fats is minimal. You should take a biochem course and a medical oriented nutrition course, so you can get a macro and microscopic understanding of our metabolism.
4 months ago
Anonymous
It's not wrong. I'm not going to read that guys post but we can effectively turn fat into protein.
When you eat protein you break it down into amino acids and those circulate in your blood stream. On every pass through the liver the amount in the bloodstream is roughly halved and glucose. The amount it's reduced is related to insulin levels. More insulin the more protein is allowed to circulate the lower the more aggressively it converts it.
Fun add on: what fat cells release through lypolysis is fatty acids and glyerol which can either be used to build muscle or metabolized by mitochondria. So we can pretty much do anything with fat or make fat out of anything. It's just such a lossy process with pure protein though.
4 months ago
Anonymous
How much protein do bodybuilders really need?
4 months ago
Anonymous
It's pretty much impossible to say with any real clarity since protein synthesis is affected by so many factors. So I would listen to the broscience first of 1g/lb. Maybe higher if you're on a low carb diet because of the insulin thing. Maybe lower if you're on a high carb diet.
4 months ago
Anonymous
So can all macronutrients potentially be converted into all other macronutrients? Is it wrong to say that if you can make anything with fat, and make fat out of anything, that you could convert carbs into fat, and since fat can make anything you could convert the carbs that turned into fat into protein? Does this logic follow? I wonder why then are fat and protein essential and carbs aren't, is it micronutrients or something else?
4 months ago
Anonymous
Not easily and not with same effectiveness. There's a lot of conversions that are downright horrible to the point it would rather cannibalize healthy tissue because it's just easier. Carbs are only non-essential is because we meet the needs of the tissues that require them through glucogensis which again is not easy but it's enough. If those tissues required even a little more than we could produce they would be essential. It doesn't mean optimal not to eat them.
The animal humans are most like when it comes to naturally occuring diet are pigs. We both eat roots, meat, veg. We have similar tolerances for partially rotten food and pigs even crack and eat bones to get at marrow. We are so similar that whole, freshly killed and unbled pigs are used by forensic scientists to determine the decomposition rate of human bodies and the growth of different species of local maggot flies in different environments and humidities to help identify time of death for "still-gooey" bodies.
I only said the human digestive tract is closest to canines which is true >naturally occurring diet >roots and veggies
Not natural for humans, considering we can't eat them in their natural untampered state
4 months ago
Anonymous
homies never heard of cooking
4 months ago
Anonymous
Pigs eat that stuff in its natural state, so humans should also be able to if it's part of our natural diet. But we can't because it's toxic and fibrous.
4 months ago
Anonymous
I think you're right that early humans were predominantly reliant on animals for most of their diet. But I would stress Early. Both homosexual Erectus and Neanderthals had already tamed fire before the earliest homosexual Sapiens even show up in the fossil record. Humans as we are are less than 500k years old and the things that make them most distinct is toolmaking and inventiveness. I don't think it's a stretch at all to call Humans omnivores rather than faculative carnivores considering that the two other proto-human species that grew alongside us were also using fire to roast things.
Cooking it older than Humans are, it's not overstepping to say that we evolved with heated foods in our environment.
It's an odd irony that on the way to what we are now we'd swing from the first upright apes which were an almost completely herbivorous prey species; to an apex facultive carnivore and then back to the middle of the road omnivorism brought up by our ability to mold our environment around ourselves.
4 months ago
Anonymous
homies never heard of cooking
K then Ill just keep eating my snickers and die in my 90s while you play Russian roulette every time you eat your uncooked “primal” chicken.
Why nobody remembers that our species HSS is only 300k years old and humans been cooking for at least 1 million of year. So we always eaten cooked food since the beginning
>single cow
There were a lot of animals larger than a modern cow on the African savannah 2.5 million years ago. >30 people tribe
I'm sure there were some groups that were that large more larger but I think a lot of the family groups were smaller than that. Another important factor is early "humans" were a lot smaller than we are now, so the calorie needs were much less. I think we're thinking of separate times in early history. I was referring to the initial switch from plant dominant diet ala chimps, to eating proportionally more fats and meats, which allowed their brains to grow. Their fats and proteins were likely all animal based. Obviously a pretty small amount in a bodybuilding context but it was enough to make a difference over a few million years.
I'm basically only arguing against fat being more important than carbs. Because physiologically, it is the other way around. If people's brains grew because they went out into savannah and got more total kcal from fat and protein, I'm not arguing about that. I'm arguing against eating a ton of fat now. I'm done though, what others do doesn't really concern me
Modern humans are also 10,000 times more populus than even 200,000 year ago. We're literally the most varied we've ever been, for good and ill. The omly real problem is that technology has advanced far enough that we now feed the least fit along with the most fit. So our genepool keeps expanding in all directions rather than having the weak, sickly and frail die off before they can have children.
All that untermench/ubermench shit the Germans were into 90 years ago did have some vague scientific basis. They just fot rid of the chronically ill, deaf and moronic people so quick they had to move on to other less obvious differences.
The facultative carnivore >Obligate carnivores are those that rely entirely on animal flesh to obtain their nutrients; examples of obligate carnivores are members of the cat family. Facultative carnivores are those that also eat non-animal food in addition to animal food. Note that there is no clear line that differentiates facultative carnivores from omnivores; dogs would be considered facultative carnivores.
Humans and dogs are both primarily and ideally carnivorous. Animal based diets are healthier than plant based.
Every animal is potentially omnivorous. What reveals your true diet is your digestive tract, and humans are natural carnivores.
Ketards and all “nature fallacy” gays are so fricking stupid.
A plane isn’t natural either. Are you going to swim next time you want to cross the Atlantic?
Not a fallacy considering the context. We are naturally designed a certain way and going against your nature can only be bad. Argumentum ad absurdum btw.
Ketards and all “nature fallacy” gays are so fricking stupid.
A plane isn’t natural either. Are you going to swim next time you want to cross the Atlantic?
The correct diet for most humans, for now, is omnivore. If your central nervous system developed fully(for many of you it did not, leading to the pseudoscience midwits spread), you can 'listen' closely to your senses and 'know' what is needed through the chemical receptors of your nose. In addition, a primitive visual-chemical cataloging system is kept in brain tissue, organizing photo memory of all that you've eaten in the past and correlating it to the appropriate chemical signature, in effect eventually allowing the organism to 'know' what to eat based on sight alone, no knowledge of language required. Eventually the entire stomach system will need to be replaced with a new bioengineered structure and cell line that will expunge all foreign organisms from the human form, freeing humanity from our reliance on the haphazard bacteria biome that festers within our guts.
I personally don't care if people want carbs. They are tasty and comforting.
I've given up that life, thoughever.
My car can run on flats for 50 miles, doesn't mean it's optimal.
LOL what logic is this?
Keto is the emergency mode for the body, not the optimal diet. This is when your body is using everything to keep the fire going, fat is used as the primary source now instead of carbs. Muscle mass declines, skin and hair becomes more brittle, eyes more sunken, teeth and gums more brittle, all around just more lean. You're not biologically expected to this like this for the rest of your life, a few weeks maybe a few months if possible or until you find more fuel (carbs, protein and fat).
If my car has run-on-flat tires and it can go another 50 miles before they are completely flat and my car can't go anymore, it's not optimal to drive on them for any longer than I have to.
Same goes with veganism, people who just eat plants suffer the same effects because they are limiting their diet and the body doesn't like that.
except you can live into your 90s eating no plants or carbs at all. Bad analogy
>except you can live into your 90s eating no plants or carbs at all
I can theoretically drive on spokes, doesn't mean it's good. Some people are born with cars that run on metal spokes altogether and the climate they live in allows that adaptation to prosper.
>except you can live into your 90s eating no plants or carbs at all.
Post one example
It's harder to do in modern society thanks to big pharma pumping you full of vaccines and making you moronic, but if you manage to fight against the public schooling and go against your teachings, you can find that things work differently in reality.
?si=BY132yLdiCocHeVa
>cant post an example, and posts cope instead
I know alcoholics that live to their 80s thats not an achievement. Carnivore along with all other meme diets are gay
I'm not clicking the link but if that's the rancher that shawn baker shills then she eats "meat based" she isnt carnivore
Meat based is carnivore
Its not. She eats plants
65 isnt 90
There are no 90 year old people who have eaten low carb for 90 years. You have made this up and you have literally zero evidence for it.
It's actually the opposite, keto (fat burning) is the default metabolism. Your body values what it spares, in other words, whatever it uses up first is what is less important. It'll want to use up alcohol first, carbs second, and then fat. Think of it another way, if you were to fast your body would use up the least important things first like alcohol, then carbs, then fat, and then protein. This isn't exactly the case as if there's defective cells it will use up that for protein needs but we're talking moreso in terms of fuel. Furthermore, fat and protein are the building blocks as well as fuel sources (with protein rarely being used as fuel and fat being preferentially used as fuel), while carbs are purely a source of fuel, it cannot be used for anything else which is why fat and protein are required and carbs are not, the body in the absence of carbs will switch to a fat metabolism and create any carbs it needs given the demands. To say that muscle mass would decline, skin and hair become brittle, and so on, is just wrong, all that requires is fat and protein and whatever carbs are needed will be made according to the demands.
>To say that muscle mass would decline, skin and hair become brittle, and so on, is just wrong
Why does it happen so often to people on keto than?
gut microbiome can take a few months to adapt to diet changes. Probably related to this I suspect. It's also why keto diarrhea happens. But it doesn't happen at all if you ease into it
It's not gut microbiome. The stomach can process meat just fine. The symptoms described are likely the result of hypothyroidism caused by type 3 diabetes. The body's ability to synthesize endogenous carbs are impacted by insulin resistance and it takes time to heal. Very low but not no carb is required. This is a trait of disease and will eventually go away as the body adapts to clean eating again
And then, if you accidently revert back to eating carbs, your body goes fricking haywire and you feel like you have the flu for like 2 weeks. Very low reward, high risk diet. Maybe if I was huddled around a fire eating a dead caribou for 3 days I wouldn't mind but times have changed.
The same logic applies to if someone "reverts" to eating fat, point is your body will adapt best it can to whatever diet you're eating so anything relatively new will make it go haywire.
If we're talking about anecdotes then I don't know, you could pull up someone on "keto" where that happens and I can find someone on "keto" where that doesn't happen, ultimately we don't know if they're actually on keto.
What this anon says could also be true, if someone's switching to a keto diet when their body is adapted to carb burning it will need to upregulate whatever it needs to start digesting and burning fat and making carbs according to the body's demands. The gut microbiome will need to adapt to the new diet as well. Any diet a person changes to will make the person get worse before they get better because the body needs to adapt to it, barring exceptions like if they were eating so bad that anything would improve their situation or if they were starving
With all this in mind, should I eat more fats? My diet is roughly 40% protein, 40% carb, 20% fat. My goal is fat loss, but I also lift 4x per week so I want energy to do so. Never tried keto before.
try
60-70%carb
20-30%protein
10%fat
avoid fructose and do cardio. eat when you feel like it
>Think of it another way, if you were to fast your body would use up the least important things first like alcohol, then carbs, then fat, and then protein.
That's not what happens though
>You won't believe her age
She looks old as shit. You are as stupid as a woman.
>It's actually the opposite, keto (fat burning) is the default metabolism
By default a computer is off.
Where did our ancestors get coca cola and cheetos? Surely there are records of ancestral corn syrup if it's our optimal diet
>what are fruits
Plants literally evolved for us to eat them and shit out their seeds
What about us humans? We use tools to hunt animals. Why would we need tools if a plant domesticated us?
>We use tools to hunt animals
That's a fairly recent development, evolutionarily speaking
Okay, so humans having the stomach acidity of a scavenger is proof that we were scavengers of carcasses before we became hunters. What's your point? At what point do you argue we share a common ancestor with plants? It's irrelevant
Yeah, yeah, whatever
I don't care about soience, what I care about is that Chris Bumstead eats carbs.
>Why would we need tools if a plant domesticated us
Why not? If you can do something good for yourself why not do it? If you can eat some grain with your meat and have no foul reaction from it, go ahead and farm it. It's variation in diet, the body learns and likes novelty in all things from fitness to diet.
Agriculture wasn't a thing before we learned to use tools. Tools allowed us to also farm. Why would we need to develop tools to pick fruit? Monkeys don't use tools
Fruits moron.
Tools are used for a lot of things. Ever heard of a shovel? A pitch fork? A basket? moron.
Top of the curve?
they didn't, they ate root vegetables, fruits, and honey you dipshit. And yes, plenty of meat as well
how did they eat root vegetables when they're toxic for humans?
The meat eater hunter ape that lives on a tree branch
as long as you're not promoting vegan
I always do the optional objectives in video games because it gives you getter rewards. Your move ketocels.
Carbs are the mini games not the side quests homosexual
That doesn't make sense, but even if it did, mini games also give you additional rewards dumbass
I don't think caveman gave a shit what they ate as long as it wasn't a known poison and piece of literal shit.
>apes evolve into humans
>humans evolve to be bigger than apes
>as humans evolve we got weaker and weaker
what the frick?
Humans lost a few bones and joints in the hands to allow for more dexterity which resulted in weaker grip strength but we're still stronger than chimps for example.
They're pound for pound about 10-20% stronger than us but we're larger. If you compare lifting strength humans are a lot stronger than chimps but we get grip strength mogged.
There is more than one type of "ape". What metric are you using to measure the strength of extinct proto-humans?
your mother
Humans are the omnivore-est ape that's ever existed.
Unlike most of the other great apes (that have survived now) we didn't evolve for a jungle environment. We evolved in a bit of africa that was dominated by lakes, savannah, cliffs and the sea.
We evolved to migrate from place to place and gather food from multiple different and distinct sources. That means we generalized to an insane degree.
Chimps, gorillas, orangutans, even lesser apes like gibbons all evolved to climb trees and eat stuff you find in the jungle.
>humans are not as specialised as chimps for climbing, but we are adequate enough to gather food
Tree/cliff food (fruit, honey)
>human fingers go pruney when submerged in water, giving them a better grip for searching along shorelines and underwater. The only other primate this happens to is the Japanese Macaque (the hot spring monkeys)
Shoreline food (Shellfish/crustaceans)
>humans are able to travel long-distance, other primates can't
Seasonal food potentially hundreds of miles away (different berries/plants)
>when humans walk/run our heads don't move around. Our bodies concertina around our skull so we can focus our eyes on a point and sprint towards it. We are the only primate species (including neanderthals and homosexual erectus) to do this
Aids in hunting small game
>we are the only primate that can throw objects with enough force to seriously wound at more than 30 ft
Chimps are crack shots when flinging shit at chinese zoo tourists but they can't actually throw a rock hard enough to hurt something unless it's in spitting distance
This is all stuff we evolved to be able to do before you even consider tools and shit.
A chimp can tear your arm out of its socket but you can literally cave its skull in with a fist-sized rock provided you don't throw like a woman.
TL;DR primates are cool as frick but they can only survive in the jungle, we environment-mog the frick out of ALL of them
All of those hunting skills were for picking fruit, obviously.
A lot of our "hunting skills" were already in place before we developed the idea to sharpen a stick and throw it at a deer or an elephant. homosexual sapiens, neanderthals and homosexual erectus all hunted small game and collected shellfish before any of us became developed enough to hunt the big game species.
Thia is why we almost universally wiped the largest, least populus herbivore species out within 200,000 years of arriving in an area. Stuff like mammoths, hippos and giant elk were all low-population widespread species across europe and siberia that we hunted to extinction. Deer and horses and shit bred more frequently and matured more quickly, so their populations survived us arriving.
suprisingly quality reply for a shitpost, thanks anon
>That means we generalized to an insane degree.
This is what all these moronic arguments ignore, that humans are adept at adaptation. Much like pigs, our 'optimal' food is basically any old shit.
It's always blah blah muh hunter gathers, but the diet between a hunter gatherer in northern europe vs southern south america would be quite different
>lesser strength
any great ape would rip you to shreds if they wanted to.
>greater dexterity
they cannot run, jog or walk as effectively as we do. we also have more efficient hands.
>greater constitution
the ability to sweat is one of the most broken things about humanity.
>greater intelligence
the ability to make and interpret symbols is broken
>greater wisdom
the ability to conject and philosophize is broken
>greater charisma
the ability to manipulate others without overt force is broken
I tried carnivore. I love it and I'm gonna go carnivore again.
But I ate carbs on this Christmas and it made my muscles look better.
The optimal diet probably uses some small amount of carbs.
A lot less than people think though.
Once I reach that sweet 10-12% bodyfat I'm gonna add some small amounts of fruit one or two times a week.
I do carnivore with honey, milk, and some fruit juice. It works for me. All that matters is results.
Try eating nothing but nuts for a month and report back.
So you eat protein, probably fat, glucose, fructose, and galactose (aka glucose). If you are lean now, and eating appreciable amount of fat, it's gonna catch up in a few years, and you'll become fat, I guarantee it because that's what I did and that's what happened to me. Now I dropped most of the fat from the diet, and am slowly losing fat and gaining strength.
I'm in my 30s and I was always skelly until I started eating this diet. I now have some muscle and basically no fat. I couldn't get fat if I tried; it's not a concern.
Also, it's fine to have some fat on you as long as it's healthy fat from healthy foods (aka saturated fat). Fat protects your body from toxins. Landwhales who eat seed oils are the ones who are fricking up their bodies.
>I do this specific restrictive diet but actually not at all
I don't define myself by my diet because I'm not a moron. Call it animal-based if you want; the label is irrelevant. I eat mostly beef and raw milk with some honey, raw butter, and occasional fruit juice.
>I don't define myself by my diet
Good think literally zero people said you did
> I eat mostly beef and raw milk with some honey, raw butter, and occasional fruit juice.
OK cool, so not carnivore
>Still arguing labels as if anyone here cares
Kys homosexual
Concession accepted
>users label himself
>Why are you using labels on me
I don't understand how this is supposed to trigger lifters. We eat fat and protein for muscle fuel and then carbs on top of it on account of the high energy demands of muscular synthesis and maintenance.
I love with IST likes to pretend they’re all nutritious gurus all of a sudden
Just because you've chosen to learn nothing in the time you've had on this Earth doesn't mean everyone else is as pathetic as you are. If you've nothing to contribute to the discussion then go do some research and come back instead of trying to insult people for being better than you.
I know a lot more about nutrition than your average person
Where did they find fats in the wild? Are ketolards so deluded they think wild animals look like factory farmed pigs and cows?
what are megafauna for $1000!
Elephants and hippos are megafauna. Elephants are 8.5% fat. Hippos are probably even leaner. Polar bears and mammoths are fat but that's not where humans evolved.
Btw dietary protein, when liver is not full of glycogen, is mostly converted into glycogen immediately (it makes several passes in the bloodstream, going through the liver every pass, iirc 25% gets converted every pass, every pass lasts several minutes).
organs, nuts and fish
the main food for scavengers
Nuts are seasonal and have a very low yield, especially in the wild, to be a staple. Organs are low fat, unless it's brains. Elephant brain is 5kg, Horse brain is 600g.
Fish idk about, but I suspect most oily fishes are saltwater, and freshwater fish is rarely fatty, and if it is, it's also seasonal, regional or rare.
a walnut tree can feed 50 humans alone with the calories it yields wtf are you talking about
you can literally brain afk chill under a walnut tree the entire fall and you won't have any problems except for acne
I live in a mountaneous country with a walnut tree in every yard, people predominantly use walnuts for sweets or crushed, for sauces. Bread is a staple here.
Yeah I'm sure my 6'1 ass is stunted compared to a sentinelese.
Bone marrow. Some of the earliest cases of stone tool use was for breaking open bones to get at the marrow other predators would skip.
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/bone-marrow#nutrition
I'm all for eating bone marrow over lard/butter/veg oil but you don't get that much marrow out of a single cow, I'm saying that as someone who buys marrow bones for marrow. Like, it's enough for a single person for a week, but no way it could be a significant kcal contribution for a 30 people tribe unless you're killing an animal a day, even then idk.
Hunting skills are for hunting stop larping as le epic carnivore. Humans ate a combo diet. Grains are fine. Humans need glucose, glucose is protein sparing, protein is turned into glucose when there's not enough of it. Dietary fat, as a macronutrient, is only useful to make plant compounds like curcumin or quercetin bioavailable. As a source of energy, it's only useful for a couple of organs. Muscles run on glucose. Brain runs on glucose. Testes run on glucose. Eating massive amounts of fatty meat or butter is moronic. Eating organ meats or marrow, yeah, great. Eating grains, great. Eating pure sugar, not great.
Humans are carnivore though, according to our digestive tract. It's most similar to canines. Any plant stuff a paleo human consumed was out of desperation. The animal products are always prioritized. And how are grains good but sugar bad? Grain is worse than pure sugar.
Sugar = fructose + glucose. Glucose = good, rapidly absorbed into muscle and liver, raises metabolism, there's a pathway that shuttles glucose to muscles (if they're glycogen-depleted) without raising insulin.
Fructose = bad, doesn't get used by muscles, only used to top up liver glycogen, hangs out in the bloodstream and causes inflammation, gradually turns into fat.
Grain = starch = pure slow glucose = good. Replace grains with potatos or buckwheat, I don't care.
Canines are omnivores. You can subsist on pure carni if you want, but most of the protein you eat will be turned into glucose.
Nope, canines and humans are facultative carnivores. Both need to eat mostly a variety of animal tissues to maintain optimal health and cannot handle fiber. Plant stuff is just filler you can eat if your desperate. Every single animal is an omnivore using your logic.
>most of the protein you eat will be turned into glucose
I think this is wrong, but this isn't expert opinion, just what makes sense to me. Protein isn't used as fuel, either carbs or fat are used as fuel, protein is only used in fuel when carbs and fat are used up, and when the body converts to a fat burning metabolism it'll use fats where it can and make carbs from fat according to the demands. In my n=1 experience, I never felt my "energy" needs satiated by eating protein, when I feel like I need energy and I tune into what my body wants it is craving fats and/carbs, not protein. It wouldn't make sense either that excess protein would be converted into glucose given how important protein is and how much the body doesn't want to us it as fuel, and the making of carbs is demand driven, it's not made just because there's an excess of fat or protein (if you're in keto).
>and make carbs from fat according to the demands
Read into beta oxidation glucose production from fats is minimal. You should take a biochem course and a medical oriented nutrition course, so you can get a macro and microscopic understanding of our metabolism.
It's not wrong. I'm not going to read that guys post but we can effectively turn fat into protein.
When you eat protein you break it down into amino acids and those circulate in your blood stream. On every pass through the liver the amount in the bloodstream is roughly halved and glucose. The amount it's reduced is related to insulin levels. More insulin the more protein is allowed to circulate the lower the more aggressively it converts it.
Fun add on: what fat cells release through lypolysis is fatty acids and glyerol which can either be used to build muscle or metabolized by mitochondria. So we can pretty much do anything with fat or make fat out of anything. It's just such a lossy process with pure protein though.
How much protein do bodybuilders really need?
It's pretty much impossible to say with any real clarity since protein synthesis is affected by so many factors. So I would listen to the broscience first of 1g/lb. Maybe higher if you're on a low carb diet because of the insulin thing. Maybe lower if you're on a high carb diet.
So can all macronutrients potentially be converted into all other macronutrients? Is it wrong to say that if you can make anything with fat, and make fat out of anything, that you could convert carbs into fat, and since fat can make anything you could convert the carbs that turned into fat into protein? Does this logic follow? I wonder why then are fat and protein essential and carbs aren't, is it micronutrients or something else?
Not easily and not with same effectiveness. There's a lot of conversions that are downright horrible to the point it would rather cannibalize healthy tissue because it's just easier. Carbs are only non-essential is because we meet the needs of the tissues that require them through glucogensis which again is not easy but it's enough. If those tissues required even a little more than we could produce they would be essential. It doesn't mean optimal not to eat them.
The animal humans are most like when it comes to naturally occuring diet are pigs. We both eat roots, meat, veg. We have similar tolerances for partially rotten food and pigs even crack and eat bones to get at marrow. We are so similar that whole, freshly killed and unbled pigs are used by forensic scientists to determine the decomposition rate of human bodies and the growth of different species of local maggot flies in different environments and humidities to help identify time of death for "still-gooey" bodies.
I only said the human digestive tract is closest to canines which is true
>naturally occurring diet
>roots and veggies
Not natural for humans, considering we can't eat them in their natural untampered state
homies never heard of cooking
Pigs eat that stuff in its natural state, so humans should also be able to if it's part of our natural diet. But we can't because it's toxic and fibrous.
I think you're right that early humans were predominantly reliant on animals for most of their diet. But I would stress Early. Both homosexual Erectus and Neanderthals had already tamed fire before the earliest homosexual Sapiens even show up in the fossil record. Humans as we are are less than 500k years old and the things that make them most distinct is toolmaking and inventiveness. I don't think it's a stretch at all to call Humans omnivores rather than faculative carnivores considering that the two other proto-human species that grew alongside us were also using fire to roast things.
Cooking it older than Humans are, it's not overstepping to say that we evolved with heated foods in our environment.
It's an odd irony that on the way to what we are now we'd swing from the first upright apes which were an almost completely herbivorous prey species; to an apex facultive carnivore and then back to the middle of the road omnivorism brought up by our ability to mold our environment around ourselves.
Why nobody remembers that our species HSS is only 300k years old and humans been cooking for at least 1 million of year. So we always eaten cooked food since the beginning
dogs aren't carnivores you fricking moron, cats are
>single cow
There were a lot of animals larger than a modern cow on the African savannah 2.5 million years ago.
>30 people tribe
I'm sure there were some groups that were that large more larger but I think a lot of the family groups were smaller than that. Another important factor is early "humans" were a lot smaller than we are now, so the calorie needs were much less. I think we're thinking of separate times in early history. I was referring to the initial switch from plant dominant diet ala chimps, to eating proportionally more fats and meats, which allowed their brains to grow. Their fats and proteins were likely all animal based. Obviously a pretty small amount in a bodybuilding context but it was enough to make a difference over a few million years.
I'm basically only arguing against fat being more important than carbs. Because physiologically, it is the other way around. If people's brains grew because they went out into savannah and got more total kcal from fat and protein, I'm not arguing about that. I'm arguing against eating a ton of fat now. I'm done though, what others do doesn't really concern me
That makes sense, I just really like the pleistocene epoch so I look for any excuse to ramble about it.
>If something was done by the ancient humans, just about they diverted from being literal monkeys, it must've been the best
>cheetos and coca cola must be optimal for the human digestive system because I've known them for all of my life!
no one is arguing pro cheetos and coke you absolute homosexual
Evolution isn't real. The way the original humans are is still the best.
Modern humans mog them in pretty much anything. Even a 300lbs landwhale outlives them by far lmao old humans are pathetic species
Modern humans are by far the most sick, deprived and stunted humanoids have ever been. Humanity is in a fallen state.
Modern humans are also 10,000 times more populus than even 200,000 year ago. We're literally the most varied we've ever been, for good and ill. The omly real problem is that technology has advanced far enough that we now feed the least fit along with the most fit. So our genepool keeps expanding in all directions rather than having the weak, sickly and frail die off before they can have children.
All that untermench/ubermench shit the Germans were into 90 years ago did have some vague scientific basis. They just fot rid of the chronically ill, deaf and moronic people so quick they had to move on to other less obvious differences.
The facultative carnivore
>Obligate carnivores are those that rely entirely on animal flesh to obtain their nutrients; examples of obligate carnivores are members of the cat family. Facultative carnivores are those that also eat non-animal food in addition to animal food. Note that there is no clear line that differentiates facultative carnivores from omnivores; dogs would be considered facultative carnivores.
Humans and dogs are both primarily and ideally carnivorous. Animal based diets are healthier than plant based.
Humans are omnivore
Proof: me. I am a human. I eat everything.
Every animal is potentially omnivorous. What reveals your true diet is your digestive tract, and humans are natural carnivores.
Not a fallacy considering the context. We are naturally designed a certain way and going against your nature can only be bad. Argumentum ad absurdum btw.
K then Ill just keep eating my snickers and die in my 90s while you play Russian roulette every time you eat your uncooked “primal” chicken.
>chicken ceviche and sashimi LE BAD
>le bad
Why do you say it like that? It sounds gay.
Ketards and all “nature fallacy” gays are so fricking stupid.
A plane isn’t natural either. Are you going to swim next time you want to cross the Atlantic?
Evolution is fake.
The correct diet for most humans, for now, is omnivore. If your central nervous system developed fully(for many of you it did not, leading to the pseudoscience midwits spread), you can 'listen' closely to your senses and 'know' what is needed through the chemical receptors of your nose. In addition, a primitive visual-chemical cataloging system is kept in brain tissue, organizing photo memory of all that you've eaten in the past and correlating it to the appropriate chemical signature, in effect eventually allowing the organism to 'know' what to eat based on sight alone, no knowledge of language required. Eventually the entire stomach system will need to be replaced with a new bioengineered structure and cell line that will expunge all foreign organisms from the human form, freeing humanity from our reliance on the haphazard bacteria biome that festers within our guts.