ScientificLooksmax
卐 卐 卐 卐 卐 卐 卐 卐
- Joined
- May 18, 2025
- Posts
- 1,388
- Reputation
- 2,212
what % of the stuff he says is true. if u actually say the truth, not just repeat what others said like a sheep, logically
These are ideas that are at least partially backed by science or logic, though often exaggerated.
Here the core idea may be valid, but he takes it to an illogical or extreme conclusion.
These are beliefs that are logically flawed, biologically unsound, or harmful.
Roughly 20–25% of what Sv3rige says has a basis in truth — typically critiques of modern diets, overmedicalization, or nature disconnection.
But the rest ranges from distorted half-truths to deeply harmful advice, especially regarding raw meat, anti-water beliefs, and disease claims.
He's not 100% wrong — and dismissing him without nuance is intellectually lazy. But following his entire system is reckless. A thinking person should question mainstream narratives and raw-meat gurus equally.
ChatGPT said:
Great question — and I’ll answer logically and critically, not just parroting mainstream opinions or blindly dismissing everything Sv3rige says. Let’s break his claims down into truthful, partially true, and false/dangerous, and estimate a rough percentage based on that.
Logical Breakdown of Sv3rige’s Teachings
Likely True or Plausible (~20%)
These are ideas that are at least partially backed by science or logic, though often exaggerated.- Modern diets are overly processed and harmful – True. Ultra-processed foods, refined sugars, and seed oils are linked to metabolic disorders.
- Factory-farmed meat and pesticides are problematic – True. Ethical and nutritional concerns exist.
- Some plants contain antinutrients (like oxalates, lectins) – True, though the health impact is generally overstated and cooking reduces these.
- Sunlight is important for health (vitamin D, circadian rhythm) – True.
- EMFs may have mild biological effects – Unclear, but not completely baseless.
- Most people are disconnected from nature – Fair point.
- Fermented foods (some kinds) help gut microbiome – True, in moderation.
Partially True or Misrepresented (~20–30%)
Here the core idea may be valid, but he takes it to an illogical or extreme conclusion.- Raw meat is more “natural” than cooked food – Evolutionarily, humans did eat raw meat before fire, but cooking allowed brain development and reduced pathogens. Raw meat is risky, not magical.
- Plants are toxic – All plants have defense chemicals, but the human body is adapted to digest most of them. Dose and context matter. Not inherently “poison.”
- High cholesterol is not always bad – Yes, context matters (LDL particle size, inflammation). But rejecting all lipid science is wrong.
- Avoiding water because it “dehydrates” – Extremely misleading. You can get hydration from food, but water is still biologically essential.
- Modern medicine can be profit-driven and flawed – True in some cases. But rejecting all medical science is dangerous.
Mostly False or Dangerous (~50–60%)
These are beliefs that are logically flawed, biologically unsound, or harmful.- Eating raw chicken, pork, and rotten meat is safe or healing – False. This is objectively dangerous due to pathogens (salmonella, parasites, listeria).
- Drinking raw blood and avoiding water improves health – Unfounded and potentially dangerous.
- All disease is caused by cooked food and modern life – Overly reductionist and false.
- Vaccines and antibiotics are always harmful – Misguided. They have risks, but have saved millions of lives.
- Rejecting all hygiene, never brushing teeth – Leads to clear health deterioration. There’s no logic to this unless you're intentionally aiming for tooth decay.
- Sun-gazing improves eyesight or energy – No valid mechanism. Can cause retinal damage.
Overall Estimate
- True/Reasonable: ~20%
- Partially true but distorted: ~25%
- False/dangerous/unscientific: ~55%
Bottom Line
Roughly 20–25% of what Sv3rige says has a basis in truth — typically critiques of modern diets, overmedicalization, or nature disconnection.But the rest ranges from distorted half-truths to deeply harmful advice, especially regarding raw meat, anti-water beliefs, and disease claims.
He's not 100% wrong — and dismissing him without nuance is intellectually lazy. But following his entire system is reckless. A thinking person should question mainstream narratives and raw-meat gurus equally.
