Why do vegans tend to look many years older than they are?
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Why do vegans tend to look many years older than they are?
Why do vegans tend to look many years older than they are?
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Lack of collagen
This. Plants dont have lots of important shit the body needs. Supplementing with expensive synthetic shit is cope
You would be surprised. There is an affordable and well designed supplement made by the vegan society which contains effectively exactly what you may end up deficient in despite a healthy diet, and it costs 8p per day.
It contains B12, Vitamin D, Iodine, Selenium and a couple of other B vitamins involved in homocysteine metabolism. Everything else your body is able to synthesise from a good varied diet, in a self-regulating manner.
And what supplement is that?
I'm only taking B12 and Vitamin D and wonder if I am deficient in some of the vitamins
The vegan society's VEG1 supplement. This is the pricing if you buy at 180 tablets (about £14). The other nutrients are more things which depend of specific dietary patterns and soil quality. You will get iodine from specific fortified foods and seaweed but otherwise it can be quite difficult or dependent on what you choose to eat. Selenium is trickier. In the UK dairy products are the major source, so if you omit that it can be difficult to compensate.
I think what you have to remember is that they are also providing the other macro and micronutrients in your diet, so you aren't really eating them in conjunction with something else, they form the full meal.
It would be closer to a 500g meal comprised of cooked peas, rice and aromatic vegetables (which themselves have high protein per calorie). And would amount to around 1/3rd of your caloric intake for the day.
I buy my rice at the Chinese supermarket, but the cheapest rice in Tesco is 52p for 1kg (what I based my calculations off). The other thing to remember is that you are buying dry rice, which is closer to 8g of protein per 100g.
That doesn't makes any sense. If 200g of chicken breast is equal to a kg of peas and you only eat a 500g meal which includes rice and vegetables (l have no idea what you mean by vegetableshave high protean they dont) that means you eat even less of the peas say 200g. You're eating a fifth or a quarter of the protein which is exactly the problem.
vegetables are high in protein per calorie
also u dont only eat the chick peas but combine them with different vegetables/grains which contain different amino acids
i can easily eat 100gr (uncooked weight) of rice with 100gr (uncooked weight) of chickpeas with 300-400gr of vegetable. It sums up being a 30gr+ protein meal with different aminoacids, vitamins, minerals and so
Sure, but you need a lot of vegetables to get the protein, and vegetables are very satiating. Also, the protein in vegetables is less bioavailable than from meat sources
>100 grams of rice is about 130 calories and 2.5 grams of protein
>100 grams of chickpeas are about 165 calories and 9 grams of protein
That is 11.5 grams of protein and about 300 calories - what are you eating vegetable wise to get to 30 grams of protein total? 400 grams of broccoli is about 130 calories and 11 grams of protein. Also, your calories are very low with all of this. No way you are eating enough in a day. It's much more efficient to just eat a chicken alongside your veggies
you calculate wrong, 100gr of uncooked rice contain 8gr of protein, 100gr of uncooked chickpeas contain 18gr of protein
i dont count rice and beans/peas as vegetables, but look at shrooms, brokkoli and so on, usually 2-4gr of protein per 20kcal or less
So you are eating 2.2 pounds or 1kg of food per meal? To only get 30 grams of protein?
basically yes, not because of the protein, but i like the taste
when u vegan u usually are lower in kcal in general so its normal to eat way bigger portions (also they contain a lot of water compared to dried stuff like cheese or sausage)
i like to eat big portions with different vegs/tastes and so on more than eating always something around a chickenbreast (which usually gets higher in calories when using fats to cook them)
I can comfortably eat a large tin of navy beans in one sitting, which is ~500g drained weight. This comes in at ~600kcal and ~40g protein. If we extrapolate that to a 3000kcal intake for a recomp, I'll hit 200g daily protein intake.
If I go for something traditionally processed like tofu, it's on par with chicken breast.
You haven't accounted for bioavailability. You're not getting 200g of protein from all that, and you'd be lucky to get 100.
Yes it is a naive extrapolation. But when you consider that there is enough flexibility in the actual diet to combine protein sources, not to mention traditional food processing techniques such as hulling, pressure cooking and fermentation, without affecting this overall calorie to protein intake ratio, it tends not to matter too much.
Studies of the digestibility of legumes on their own are not quite as severe as you make out (think 70% rather than 50%).
When we consider combining, especially with the hack of potatoes, even with regard to our actual requirements of amino acids (rather than just protein) we can get into animal protein territory. This paper provides good coverage of this. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/fsn3.1809
I wonder, since we're focused on anabolic effects anyway, perhaps the ratios of interest are different and better results can be achieved.
Even if you don't find the exact same availability, these foods are cheap, simply eat more of them.
To an extent the farm animals that you take the supplements for you. Not to mention that the supplement is part of the diet, and a small inexpensive part at that. You likely consume fortified foods, iodised salt, and eat the meat of animals fed supplements, for the same reason a vegan may take this supplement.
Still if this is truly such an important consideration, slightly modifying the diet to include mussels and oysters is sufficient and affordable given the small intake needed to meet these requirements.
*the farm animals that you eat
>it tends not to matter too much
It does. You may think you're getting 150g of protein, but you're only getting 70g
>Studies of the digestibility of legumes on their own are not quite as severe as you make out (think 70% rather than 50%).
And meat is basically 100% digestible. Your losing out by only digesting 70% of it. Sorry, but that's not a good argument in your favour. It just makes your position look even worse.
>To an extent the farm animals that you eat take the supplements for you
The difference is that even if they didn't take those supplements, I would still be able to live solely of them and not be deficient in anything. The same can't be said for your diet. This is a false equivalence and it shows your desperation. Sounds like somebody's getting pressed, eh?
if they werent our currently hygiene we also would get b12 from fruits, water, fermented stuff, vegetables... same goes for the supplemented animals, they all get b12 supplemented...
The point is that they don't NEEEEEEED it. They could go without it and be just as fine as they are now.
>Those animals would be sick if they didn't take them.
No they wouldn't. They were fine for millions of years without supplementation, they will be fine for millions of years to come without supplementation, and so will we. Your arguments all suck and you're starting to sound extremely desperate at this point. Just give up already. You're not gonna win this. I guarantee it.
they need it moron they lag b12 themselves too without supplements bc of our hygiene, even animal food is too "hygienic"
never saw an animal eat his own poop? its when they have too less b12
You can just say it's because we give them chlorinated water. But you're too afraid of sounding like a schizo which you obviously are.
Those animals would be sick if they didn't take them. The situation would be different. Farmers don't supplement animals for fun.
I bet you're the type that thinks you get protein from wheat products.
It is a bit better than that, more like 100g chicken ~ 375g cooked peas, in terms of protein. But 100g chicken will cost you 55p, whereas 375g cooked peas will cost you 30p, while providing far more nutrition.
That aside, my point was that typically, you aren't just going to be eating chicken breast, you will probably also eat it with rice or something anyway. In this case the peas are also providing carbohydrates and other nutrients, so you could have a lot less rice to compensate, so long as you get the right proportions of rice protein to complete the pea protein.
I think this forgets the nutrient density of vegetables (on a per calorie basis) and the advantages of food preparation (e.g. adding a source of vitamin C like lemon juice to improve iron absorption). Empirically too, it doesn't seem to be the case that we aren't absorbing them in an ordinary diet. 7th day adventist vegans are damn healthy, the healthiest of an already healthy population.
I do think that this is somewhat understudied though in an anabolic/fitness performance context. Especially when looking at overall dietary patterns rather than short term supplementation of protein isolates.
For protein there is good data on quality/digestibility if you look at studies of DIAAS. Potato protein being an especially strange one.
>other macro and micronutrients in your diet
Maybe for rodents and birds, who evolved to eat grains. Not for you, a human being.
>In the UK dairy products are the major source
Sorry. In the UK dairy products are the major source of iodine, not selenium. I don't think I was clear.
If you are on a cut, and your focus is really on protein per calorie, I would focus more on leafy green vegetables and add some traditionally processed foods like tofu, and if you can find it, the superior tofu skin. Still, at some point you'll use the protein as an energy source anyway, so it might not be worthwhile.
If you're concerned about phytoestrogens, maybe just use enough to make the macros work, but I would also bear in mind that the cheapest animal products require the most shortcuts in their production and consequently contain endocrine disrupting chemicals anyway. I would also avoid buying these outside of Chinese supermarkets, since they have a sort of health-food premium nowadays.
It may contain it, but that doesnt mean your body absorbs it. Spinach is the same way. What it has, and what it gives you, are two completely separate things. Hell, even the proteins from a whole egg aren't completely used for building. Only half. The rest of the nitrogen gets pissed out.
>what is bioavailability?
unproven pseudoscience
brb gonna chew my cud
>unproven pseudoscience
Anyone got that pic showing that eating oysters with black beans resulted in no zinc being absorbed?
Never mind, Found it.
Oh sorry dude, meant to quote the other guy
It's all good. 😉
Debunked
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022316623273137
>Corn doesn't inhibit the iron absorption in anemic rats
Did you even read the abstract? You think that disproves the concept of bioavailability?
iron and zinc are the same thing?
>It's psuedoscience because I don't like it
Bioavailability is not psuedoscience. It is well established, and fundamental to pharmacology. You really think your body absorbs every nutrient you eat?
You replied to the wrong person.
>never done drugs in his life
this is not bragging about having done countless substances(non roids) but if you were a substance user you would never make a moronic claim like this because it would be too good to be true
If you HAVE to take a supplement to make sure you're not deficient, then it means your diet is fundamentally flawed. I don't have to take any supplements whatsoever on my diet.
They do?
Because everyone ages?
Not that badly they don't.
Don't be obtuse
They usually deficient in usually methionine and lysine. Which are probably two of the most important ones for things like connective tissue and preventing facial muscle atrophy. Then you have collagen and all the fat soluble vitamin deficiencies that are hell on your hormones. Basically if you're not rich you can't actually afford to go vegan and are just killing yourself for a status/virtue thing.
>if you're not rich you can't actually afford to go vegan
While I think this is true in practice, it is not fundamentally true. It's more that the poor lack the education to adopt an affordable yet balanced vegan diet. The rich don't have to worry about affordability and can pay a premium for someone else to figure out that balance for them (e.g. your upmarket supermarket pre-prepared, yet fairly minimally processed "Buddha bowl").
Vegan diets are actually cheaper if you know what you're doing. Even if you look at not especially cheap supermarkets like Tesco, in the UK.
Cheapest caged-hen eggs: ~£3.40 per 100g protein
Cheapest cheddar: ~£2.45 per 100g protein
Cheapest chicken breast pieces: ~£2.29 per 100g protein
Cheapest dried split peas: ~£0.81 per 100g protein
Cheapest rice: ~£0.66 per 100g protein
While this may seem a little disingenuous since we are focused on one macronutrient, and because the protein quality is not comparable, but when you combine both the rice and the peas, you do have comparable protein quality to animal products so
Cheapest rice and peas (balanced for protein qualtiy): at most £0.81 per 100g protein
I hate comparisons like this one. 20g of protein from peas isn't the same as 20g of protein from breast chicken even setting aside protein quality. I can eat 200g of chicken breast without any issues, I don't feel full nor do I get tired of it (if cooked in an interesting way), and I get around 50 grams of protein. To do the same with peas you have to eat close to a kg of them. Can you? Is that manageable?
Where are you buying rice? Rice is 3g protein per 100 grams.
You'd have to eat 3kg of rice to get 100g protein.
Find me 3kg of rice for 66p
>just eat 3 kilos of rice a day bro
Its not about that. I should have also included information about the protein per calorie of common vegetables, my point is that if you're careful with the amount of rice, a well formulated dish of aromatic vegetables, rice and split peas will benefit from the protein combining, you will have a dish that is still providing adequate protein while being both considerably cheaper and an excellent source of other nutrients.
There is no desperation, I am only trying to make the point that there are healthy vegan dietary patterns that are price competitive with omnivorous diets that don't compromise on aspects of health pertaining to physical fitness.
Now here I think that you are conflating farm animals with them in their natural setting. They are not wild creatures grazing on varied forage on fertile lands. This is true especially when we consider the kind of livestock that stand a chance at being price competitive with the foods I'm suggesting. They are kept in whatever conditions and fed whatever is most economical.
Just because their ancestors were fine without supplementation, they were raised in a very different context. In the modern day farming it is far cheaper (at least in the short term) to just give them an inadequate diet and compensate with supplements.
There was something of a controversy a while ago in the UK after some paper was published with the finding that organic milk had a much lower iodine content than conventionally farmed milk, and it was for this reason.
>when you combine both the rice and the peas, you do have comparable protein quality
Protein quality includes digestibility which is lower for both rice and peas. Eating them together will not change that. Digestibility includes the ability for chemical reactions in your stomach to actually break down proteins into amino acids. Anyone who has taken basic chemistry should know that reactions have different rates and different yields simply by changing one component in the formula. And then there are the actual yields which are lower than the theoretical yields. Not only do plant proteins have lower theoretical yields from being different proteins to those found in meat, they will have much lower actual yields.
>eating rice for protein
This is like that vegan DYEL who posts about broccoli protein. Just like Broccoli, when accounting for digestibility, you would have to eat an extremely large amount of rice just to meet the bare minimum maintenance requirements. I can eat 200-300g of chicken and meet just the maintenance requirements with under 300 calories. With rice, I'd have to eat more like 3-4kg of rice+peas just to get enough protein. Even if we say it's 50/50 peas to rice, that's more than 5000 calories in terms of peas+rice alone.
>Cheapest dried split peas: ~£0.81 per 100g protein
With 5.4g of protein per 100g of peas, you need at least 2kg of peas to get 100g of protein. Some cheap frozen peas (fresh peas are more expensive) assuming around £2 for a kg of frozen peas, you still have to spend around £4 for 100g of protein which is more expensive than that for chicken breast.
>Cheapest rice: ~£0.66 per 100g protein
Probably more along the lines of £2 to £4 to get enough rice to have 100g of protein. Accounting for digestibility will increase the price you have to pay to get 100g of absorbed protein.
vegetable protein powder
>moves the goalpost
The post was about rice and split peas v. eggs, chicken, and cheese. Not about powdered isolates v. food.
When you eat food, you get more than just protein. You get vitamins, minerals, fats, carbs, and other beneficial compounds that don't fall into the previous categories that come with it. A supplement such as a protein isolate is only relevant on top of an already good diet that already has enough complementary nutrition.
>b12 themselves too without supplements bc of our hygiene
B12 does not have anything to do with hygiene. Contrary to some of the vegan propaganda you might hear, B12 does not come from dirt.
>never saw an animal eat his own poop? its when they have too less b12
Cocophagy is dependent on species. It's most common among rodents and some animal with cecums like chimps. A cow for example does not practice cocophagy. In fact, they even tend to avoid grass around cowpies because it tastes to strong for them. Where a cow gets it b12 from is the bacteria within its stomach that it was born with. The bacteria break down fibers and other compounds in grasses to produce b12 which the cow then absorbs in its small intestine. Ruminants do not eat poop. When it comes to carnivorous animals like humans, bears, wolves, etc. B12 comes from eating muscle meat.
>without supplements
Supplementation for an animal like a cow is supplementation of cobalt which is a mineral needed to produce B12 or when a cow is fed a diet it should be fed. It only needs to be supplemented if the cow is grazing in an area where the soil is deficient in cobalt. Most places have plenty of cobalt in the soil which is then absorbed by the roots of grasses and then ends up being in the cow when eaten. Nutrition is about the diet and whether or not the animal's digestive system can produce enough of the needed compounds from what's in the food, not how much poop and dirt you eat.
> It only needs to be supplemented if the cow is grazing in an area where the soil is deficient in cobalt
Cows that are used for food dont graze
>inb4 gras fed
They are kept in a warehouse and fed grass pellets.
>They are kept in a warehouse and fed grass pellets.
It's a good thing we things like videographic/pictorial evidence that instantly proves you wrong on this. Why even make such an easily disprovable claim? Are you moronic? Do you just not think?
>Cows that are used for food dont graze
>They are kept in a warehouse
This is categorically false. Cows that are used for food are mostly raised on pastures and then moved to feedlots to maximize weight. That's of course ignoring the fact that there are pasture raised, grass fed cows that are pastured up until the day of slaughter. Dairies are a different story as it is common to just keep dairy cows on lots.
>fed grass pellets.
There is no reason to make pellets when you can keep costs down with just hay. Hay is cheap and available wherever people can grow grass or alfalfa.
Oh okay you are just lying now. Carry on I won't argue.
Major L taken. Get a load of this L magnet. L L L L L L L L L
>Protein quality and digestibility
You should read the paper I linked here
. It refers to the DIAAS of combined proteins, and you can see improvements towards the DIAAS of animal products when protein combining, and this is based on the DIAAS for ages 0.5y-3y, the >3y score is already far more generous, with onions being comparable to whey. DIAAS scores are based on the true ileal amino acid digestibility measures, and are constrained by actual amino acid requirements
>Eating rice for protein
As mentioned, this is mostly for calculation of protein source combining, you would eat rice and split peas, with just enough rice to compensate for the amino acids split peas are deficient in. It's just part of a meal, as you would likely add to the chicken dish.
>Price of split peas and rice
It is clearly written that this was about split dried peas, which are £2 per 1kg in the relatively expensive UK supermarket Tesco. Split peas contain 25g of protein per 100g. So you're looking at roughly 80p per 100g protein. I did a similar calculation for their long grain rice, which is 55p per 1kg.
>They usually deficient in usually methionine and lysine. Which are probably two of the most important ones for things like connective tissue and preventing facial muscle atrophy.
Nope.
Methionine accumulates in muscle tissue with age, and in longevity studies is associated with death.
They are deficient in collagen and methionine, but being deficient in methionine might actually be a good thing.
My guess is that going vegan for 1 year to deplete methionine might have health benefits similar to fasting, but any longer than that and you are just starving yourself, which accelerates death.
at least she stopped looking like a philippino
yeah, her inner israelite really came out and manifested.
Is that the same person?
All minimal nutrition can be found in plants and fungi. There is nothing you can't get through rigorous and painstaking supplementation.
Thriving is impossible on a vegan diet
they should eat some meat.
>how to simultaneously look emaciated and have gyno in one easy step
No wonder this guy is such an angry insecure psychopath.
woha does vegan diet change your race and eye color?
its not implying they are the same person you spastic.
just two seperate vegans who are at different stages.
Saladino eats 200g of carbs every day nice try moxyte
Carbs from fruit are great for you. Saladino would look way worse if he didn’t fix his diet at all, so how he looks now is a result of his past mistakes.
It’s the ultimate balance. All the meat you’d be eating would make vegans seethe and all the fruit and honey would make the ketogays seethe.
Nothing against fruit but he legit drenches his steak in honey. Absolutely disgusting behavior.
pic was on his carnivore diet, nice try baker.
Left: Mildly attractive
Right: mistaken by cops as a crackhead
I believe it is a demographic thing among other reasons. Sustained vegans are by necessity older due to the time requirement. Similarly veganism seems to be associated with factors such as mental illness, not necessarily caused by the diet but rather the cause of the choice to adopt the diet. There is also some association with eating disorders.
Separate from demographics, you have these two contrasting issues of traditional diets being relatively well balanced (otherwise the populations would have rejected them) and vegan diets being non-traditional, putting a higher responsibility on the person adopting the diet to figure out what to eat, and secondly that as it has been co-opted by industry, and now ultra-processed pre-prepared substitutes of traditional foods are widely available. Going back to demographics, there is going to be a difference between your standard new vegan and your health conscious, educated and culturally aligned 7th day adventist vegan.
Why do carnies have diabetes and low test
Test fluctuates so it could just be low that day. You need multiple tests to be certain you have low test. That's the way fighters used to get approved for TRT. They would work out hard and eat like shit before going in to get tested making their test levels lower.
The absolute cope
Why do you vegans always damage control by shitton on carnivores? They are far from being the only ones who bully you. It is mostly omnivores and honestly I'd be willing to bet that even vegetarians realise how delusional you homosexuals are.
Why do diet elitists always categorize people as if they are also that way? Its so sad. Didnt read past the first three words sorry.
Because intentionally chosing to not have at least a semi-balanced diet is a sign of mental illness.
I see you didnt even read past the surface of my post. Figures.
oh the ironing
>oh the ironing
Oh the irony
oh the newbie
Concession accepted
>The lab work literally says on it that the reference range for testosterone is for healthy 19-39 year old men
>Why does this quinquagenarian have less test than a 19 year old?
Frick you're stupid
they dont, there are 6 years between those pics also...
vegans on yt/social media tend to be white ppl using very less make up + living as whites without sunscreen in tropical areas beeing outside all day
this is simply not true and you will pay for spreading lies; psa i'm a fellow meat eater
Post fridge.
>ages 20 years in 6
>stops being asian and turns into a white roastie
>sunken eyes
>dry, wrinkly skin
autistic moron spotted, its not the same person, this is her today
Because it's an unhealthy life style. Same reason why people who drink, smoke, and do drugs age faster.
>normal omnivore 6-year
What lack of collagen does to a mf
Veganism is a hubristic, globalist plot for narcissists who want to beleive that "science!" and the art of modern living is better than 1M years of evolution.
Almost all Vegans - assuming they are strictly vegan - either sooner or later depending on some of their choices and some of their own personal geentic idiosyncrasies- develop deficiencies.
In the sbsence of animal products, which are nutrient dense, it is almost impossible to get all niutrietns needed for a lifetimg of growth - cadel to grave - from plants.
Oh sure, there are scientists out there who make new discoveries everyday. And these can be harvested and put into supplements and added to highly processed "PlantBased!" frankjen foods, but these are either the wronk form, wrongly digested, not bioavailable, or missing an unknown/un as yet discovered co-factor. It is hubris to beleive that we can know all the chemisclas that are needed to support life.
Even the so-called essential amino acids. What of the non-essentials that supposedly we can produce: does everyone produce them? Does everyone produce enough? What happens oif we are not getting enough of one of these so called "non-esential" amino acids? What happens to that person if there are vegan and science has not added that non-essential amino acoid to the rice/bean paste slurry? Does that vegan's health suffer?
What of choline? We now call it essential. But it wasnt always. What are the effects of cholne defciency? How about "factor X" which we havent discovered yet becuase scicne just hasnt found it; but it is abundant in meat because mammal life requires it, but its compeltely absent from onions slurry because we dont even know about it much yet to add it?
This ios why Veganism is hubris. Vegans pretend we know all we need to know, instead of submitting to out history, our biology, our traidtions, our accumulated wisdom and knowledged.
Your post makes it absolutely evident you know absolutely nothing about neither evolution, nutrition or biology.
Evolution doesn't care about your diet, it cares about you mating and that's all, if you live to your twenties, procreate and live off McDonald's evolution is fine with that even if you die at 25 because of your bad diet. It never selected a diet for you
I agree to an extent. Despite doing most of the advocacy in this thread. I personally hedge by consuming bivalves. But I think that the observational studies do point in the direction of this being not just low risk but actually beneficial. Which would be somewhat in conflict with the idea that these diets as practiced by knowledgeable health conscious people are harmful.
NTA but these observational studies don't seem to have much in common with reality-- vegans can't keep on the diet to save their lives and the ones that do were clearly mentally ill to begin with and develop blatant deficiencies over time.
Who is the chick on the right? Looks like a Vegan I lived with from Romania.
It's weird how you have weird atheistic progressive types eating vegan when the roots of veganism in the West are found in Seventh Day Adventists who historically promoted bland plant-based diets for the explicit purpose of killing people's sex drives. It's definitely a litmus test for how gullible you are.
the "science" says its the healthiest diet and will also save the planet
FAT
RED
BALD
GREASY
this doesn't explain why 99.99999% of vegans tend to look much worse than any other group of people
you are just cherry picking scizo raw vegans.