DEBATE ABOUT VEGETABLES IN THE DIET.

[KindMaster1]

There's nothing better associated with anti-aging in the scientific literature than vegetable intake lol.

Associated.
Hilarious.

 

[veggiedietcell]

@FlotPSL honestly, let's move it to a thread because arguing through my profile is a pain in the ass.

---

View attachment 3945373

You said... and I quote: "We rely on stomach acid not on enzymes", this essentially means "We rely on stomach acid" ; "We don't rely on enzymes". Maybe it's just nit-picking stuff, but even ignoring that, stomach acid STILL HAS ENZYMES. So, what was the point here?

---

View attachment 3945376
Your claim was that plants were not a part of the primitive human diet, right? Well the research disagrees, there are tons more you can dig up, but I'll be focusing on one article (which I will be providing below). "Dental microwear texture analysis shows within-species diet variability in fossil hominins"
View attachment 3945378

By comparing microwear textures of fossil hominins with those of living primates with known diets, the researchers linked specific microwear patterns to food types.

There's also more recent evidence of anciet humans consuming plant foods. These guys lived roughly when the ice age ended.
View attachment 3945426
View attachment 3945425

Here's another fun one, involved your beloved isotopes. Suggesting that 3 million years ago we were both consuming fruits and LEAVES, as well as animal products.
View attachment 3945432

And these guys lived just about when the ice age started. So all other primates eat fruits, nuts, seeds and leaves. Our ancestors from before the ice age ate leaves. Our ancestors after the ice age ate leaves too... And I'm like 99% sure we also ate some leaves, nuts, seeds and tubers during the ice age as well, they definitely weren't as common, but humans during that period ate them too, although since I don't have the evidence to cite, I won't be using that as a strong claim, since that's more an opinion rather than anything validated by any research I can provide (this is a jab at you if you didn't catch it, btw).

---

View attachment 3945381
If you want to talk about science, we also have to share studies, science is not made through opinions, it is done through scientific research, which is mostly shared through articles and studies. So yeah, since you claimed there were "tons" of studies validating what you said, I'd love to read some of them. Again, I'm also open to providing as much research as you'd want to validate every single one of the points I've made.

This conversation would turn pretty dull and meaningless if we simply limit ourselves to saying this and that, but never bothering to prove anything, at that point it just becomes a game of who can repeat their opinion the most, not actual "scientific talk".

---

View attachment 3945384
Again, the fact that we cannot digest fiber is what makes it good, because our gut microbiome CAN digest it, and that has net health benefits, and that aside fiber helps bowel movement. "But why aren't rock goods then?" what ? I'm not even gonna try to answer that one, I think you should have enough common sense to do it on your own, regardless, I'm convinced that had to be trolling.

Anyways, fiber is good for you! It helps cancer treatment, it benefits gut health, it even helps your heart!
View attachment 3945387
View attachment 3945390
View attachment 3945391

---

View attachment 3945392

1. I thought you were saying fruit was good? Fruits ARE plants.
2. Your body is mostly water... it won't dehydrate you if you consume a proper amount of electrolytes from your diet. Also, if tribal people didn't drink water, they'd be dead. Thankfully they do get their water from the food they eat, for example many of them drink blood, which as you may assume.. is mostly water! But I'd argue that their choice to avoid water is not a pragmatic, but the fact that getting clean water as an isolated community is incredibly difficult. But if we tried to get into arguing about why water is good for you, we'd be in another crazy argument, so let's leave it at that.

---

View attachment 3945398

1. Yes, anyone making a sound argument is obviouslyyy AI, am I right?
2. "Plants have no nutritional value" this is just factually incorrect. Nutrients are ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS FOR LIFE, if you get no micronutrient intake in your diet your bodily systems would quickly degrade and you would diet. So how come people survive decades eating a plant-base diet? If your statement about plants having zero nutrition was correct, then no one that doesn't eat meat, would be alive right now.
3. Plants miss over 15 micronutrients... right... like which ones?

Also Jfl at consuming legumes

Legumes, phytic acids are known to dysfunction the Nfkb pathway

 

[KindMaster1]

View attachment 3945764

Why you turned yourself into a subhuman alien. Excuse me, subalien

 

[Zeekie]

Who gives a fuck about vitamin C, brooo
I'm not eating cola all day to digest all that toxic sugar

I love how I could say 1000 things and you would only respond to the 2 which you can actually answer to
You said that vitamins were the only important metric of nutrition? What happened to that? In case you forgot all vitamins are essential, first page of any nutrition textbook. But fine FOR THE SAKE OF YOUR ARGUMENT, let's say vitamin C didn't matter... Wha about D, E, K, Calcium?

Also, I'll keep pushing you:

1. You have yet to provide any evidence that veggies are bad you.
2. You have not grappled with the available evidence that says they're good for you.
3. And you havent validated with research any of your 50 other ridiculous statements

 

[KindMaster1]

Animals almost never die of old age, they die because they get killed or sick. A lion's lifespan is 10-14 years in the wild, in captivity that extends to 20 years. So I don't knowwww could it be that instead of them "dying looking young", they just actually die young?

Also, some cases of wild animals living far beyond the average years for their species has been reported... This is an old lion, very young indeed.
View attachment 3945771

This ancient lion looks like a chad. I see NO signs of ageing. Wtf are you on!

 

[FlotPSL]

Why you turned yourself into a subhuman alien. Excuse me, subalien

That was the first drawing i made
Than someone else saw it and drew his version which is my avi now

 

[Tyler1]

This is different, what your family is doing is not right literarily speaking, cats get basically no benefit from plant foods, since (UNLIKE US) they have a very short digestive track and lack the needed enzymes to digest said foods and get any nutrition from them.

I mean that's what they have in the supermarket they sell cat food with vegetables to malnourish them the same thing happens to us and I think we all know why

Thankfully, our anatomy is vastly different from cats. Also, why the hell do you keep comparing us to wolves and cats? Wouldn't a more biologically appropriate example would be comparing us to our primate relatives? Or is that too inconvenient?

Because we exchanged our intestines for a bigger brain our primate ancestors therefore had a completely different diet, it makes no sense to compare them with us homo sapiens

First, it has been explained with very shaky logic which I have denied. If you have a very strong allergy to plants, then don't eat plants I suppose! But you aren't the majority of the human population, and I also doubt you're allergic to all plants, or properly prepared ones for that matter. But this is a situational example, your case isn't the same as the one for the majority of people.

In truth, all people are allergic to plants some are more allergic than others.
Explain to me why it is good to eat man made plants like I said they do more BAD than GOOD

Humans could live animal based (maybe also some fruit seasonally) but if every human would do that then all diseases would be CURED

Going back to the "it has been explained part!" note that explaining something, doesn't mean you're right when you lack the necessary evidence to backup said claims. I will keep repeating it, I'm open to provide evidence for EVERY SINGLE ONE OF MY CLAIMS, are you capable of doing the same however?

Aajonus is the proof

Cooking destroys some B vitamins and vitamin C, but first that destruction is partial, depending on the cooking process and length between 40-80% of the B vitamins and vitamin C are destroyed, you will say "80% is a lot!!" but that has only been seen in the strongest of cooking methods for the longest duration, most cooking processes leave 40-60% of these vitamins intact, and really, it doesn't matter that your vitamins are affected from a single food, most people eat a varied diet, so they're getting that 40-60% repeatedly from many different foods, meaning that they're not deficient in these water-soluble vitamins.

So how the hell are you going to grow up properly as a kid if you consume less animal products and cook (destroy) half of them you will never reach your genetic potential you will be smaller your skull will be more recessed plants Stunt also your growth, what a joke lol

Evidence?

define carnivore for me

Humans need to consume animals ideally only animals so they function best, are at their healthiest state and develop best in their puberty that’s why humans are carnivores we rely on animals 100%

Bears also eat berries, meat, roots, tubers and a lot that consistently. Therefore, we're omnivores (I'm making fun of you btw, I wouldn't make an argument this ridiculous ever, I'm mirroring your behavior)

This is so retarded we are humans roots and tubers are extremely toxic to humans you would vomit or get diarrhea instantly

 

[Zeekie]

This ancient lion looks like a chad. I see NO signs of ageing. Wtf are you on!

Just JFL dude

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

Obviously. In nature wild animals don't age, and this includes humans. A wild animal dies from old age while looking young

This is just false & retarded

Genetics mean nothing. You say it yourself, starvation is everything, and I just claim that malnutrition from plants is part of starvation.

Chinese in big towns, eating middle class meat and fish, grow to be 6 feet, which means there is NO difference between white Europeans / Americans compared to Asians, given same animal nutrition.

No nigger, body will use nutrition from your stored organs until you're in life or death situation, It will suck out calcium from bones, protien from muscles & so on until It causes problem.
Most people get enough, these 3rd world children are literally at the verge of death & they have severe deficiency.
You can't compare having 500% & 100% of nutrient need to 5% & 100%

There is 0 source of that big down being 6ft, they're also rich people & marry wives with superior genes

Europeans could also be taller because of our mitochondrial genetics, and cold exposure's mitochondrial light, giving us UV and IF inside cells, even without sunbathing. So, we get better cellular health.

Central Asians eat grains, more.

NO they don't.
Keep in mind they also have traditions of drinking raw milk & one of the highest consumers of dairy aswell.
They have better nutrition than Germans even.

Why.

It's essential for maintenance of glycocalyx,
There are a lot of mechanism by which fiber facilitates It's function & protection.

 

[KindMaster1]

Nfkb pathway

What's this?

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

Of course it can. If there is deficiency, you disallocate from looks and allocate to survival. If there's enough, you allocate to super health based survival. If there is abundance, healing of diseases starts, anti ageing starts (compared to all peers, being best of best), and bones grow, the more abundance the better.

I don't know what to even say

Go measure your lipid profile then abuse nutrients for a month & do it again.
Let's see you 500% gain

 

[FlotPSL]

This is just false & retarded

No nigger, body will use nutrition from your stored organs until you're in life or death situation, It will suck out calcium from bones, protien from muscles & so on until It causes problem.
Most people get enough, these 3rd world children are literally at the verge of death & they have severe deficiency.
You can't compare having 500% & 100% of nutrient need to 5% & 100%

There is 0 source of that big down being 6ft, they're also rich people & marry wives with superior genes


View attachment 3945770
NO they don't.
Keep in mind they also have traditions of drinking raw milk & one of the highest consumers of dairy aswell.
They have better nutrition than Germans even.


It's essential for maintenance of glycocalyx,
There are a lot of mechanism by which fiber facilitates It's function & protection.

No fucking way Serbia is this low

 

[KindMaster1]

This is just false & retarded

No nigger, body will use nutrition from your stored organs until you're in life or death situation, It will suck out calcium from bones, protien from muscles & so on until It causes problem.
Most people get enough, these 3rd world children are literally at the verge of death & they have severe deficiency.
You can't compare having 500% & 100% of nutrient need to 5% & 100%

There is 0 source of that big down being 6ft, they're also rich people & marry wives with superior genes


View attachment 3945770
NO they don't.
Keep in mind they also have traditions of drinking raw milk & one of the highest consumers of dairy aswell.
They have better nutrition than Germans even.


It's essential for maintenance of glycocalyx,
There are a lot of mechanism by which fiber facilitates It's function & protection.

I know for a fact they eat grains, because I'm from neighboring Russland and know what's up in general situation.

 

[veggiedietcell]

What's this?

The nfkb pathway is the main pathway which controls everything, immunity, cell development, survival and anti inflammation.
Dysfunction of this pathway can cause cancer and a whole lot of problems, lectins, phytic acids oxalates fuck the pathways up tbh.

The Covid pandemic wouldnt have existed if people had good functioning Nfkb pathway, yes this is proven

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

But HighIQ Übermensch, I don't see it that way

That's alright brother, But the evidence sees it that way

 

[FlotPSL]

That's alright brother, But the evidence sees it that way

huh?
Your right bro you know my country better than me

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

But HighIQ Übermensch, I don't see it that way

the evidencee brothaa

 

[KindMaster1]

It's essential for maintenance of glycocalyx,
There are a lot of mechanism by which fiber facilitates It's function & protection

We make protein based blood sugar, pyruvate, if we don't eat any carbs (for first part of day, by postponing fruit for example), and eating only raw protein and raw fat.
I assume there's enough pyruvate for gut lining as well.

 

[veggiedietcell]

That's alright brother, But the evidence sees it that way

i can show u evidence as to how, spinach, lectins, whole grains are bad for u lmao

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

i can show u evidence as to how, spinach, lectins, whole grains are bad for u lmao

sorry brother, But a Bald man yapping conspiracy theory ain't evidence

 

[FlotPSL]

Im a black hebrew isrealite

Da evidence!!!

 

[KindMaster1]

I don't know what to even say

Go measure your lipid profile then abuse nutrients for a month & do it again.
Let's see you 500% gain

I just said body STORES excess nutrients inside of your INACTIVE fat storage, etc. Then it gradually chronically daily uses them for secondary purposes like anti ageing and healing of disease.

 

[veggiedietcell]

sorry brother, But a Bald man yapping conspiracy theory ain't evidence

i can provide u studies

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

We make protein based blood sugar, pyruvate, if we don't eat any carbs (for first part of day, by postponing fruit for example), and eating only raw protein and raw fat.
I assume there's enough pyruvate for gut lining as well.

I seriously doubt that, there are a lot of mechanism in that layer that only fiber can do

 

[Zeekie]

Because we exchanged our intestines for a bigger brain our primate ancestors therefore had a completely different diet, it makes no sense to compare them with us homo sapiens

1. Can you cite any scientific evidence to validate this?
2. Even if we did trade our brains for our guts, how exactly does that remove our millions of years of adaptation for plant consumption? It makes sense that we may allocate more resources to our brain, but that does not explain how that leads to the complete loss of our ability to digest plants?

In truth, all people are allergic to plants some are more allergic than others.
Explain to me why it is good to eat man made plants like I said they do more BAD than GOOD

1. "man-made plants" animals are also man-made if we go to that. All plants and animals were selectively bred for our consumption.
2. Plants are good for us for a massive amount of reasons.. they have some vitamins and minerals (YES THEY HAVE LESS THAN MEAT OR ORGAN MEATS MAYBE, but they still have them)
3. They are high in fiber
4. They are packed with antioxidants
5. Research consistently correlates vegetable consumption with: better health and reduced all-cause mortality, cancer prevention, lower visceral fat and better gut health.

• PMID: 22797986, PMID: 31892257, PMID: 22583408, also the studies I cited at the beginning and so many more.

Humans could live animal based (maybe also some fruit seasonally) but if every human would do that then all diseases would be CURED

Aajonus is the proof

Conspiracy bullshit with no research to validate it.

So how the hell are you going to grow up properly as a kid if you consume less animal products and cook (destroy) half of them you will never reach your genetic potential you will be smaller your skull will be more recessed plants Stunt also your growth, what a joke lol

1. The fact that nutrition is reduced doesn't mean you get no nutrition. If I cook 4 oz of liver, maybe 50% of B12 is reduced, by even that 50% still provides all of my B12 for the day
2. Plants stunt growth, can you cite any evidence for this?

This is so retarded we are humans roots and tubers are extremely toxic to humans you would vomit or get diarrhea instantly

No, I ate potatoes for lunch yesterday, no diarrhea. And that seems to be the experience for everyone else because potatoes are one of the most consumed foods on the planet.

 

[Zeekie]

i can provide u studies

GO AHEAD! You see I respect you more than these 2 clowns now

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

I just said body STORES excess nutrients inside of your INACTIVE fat storage, etc. Then it gradually chronically daily uses them for secondary purposes like anti ageing and healing of disease.

your body stores a lot of nutrients anyway, You don't need to consume 100g iron for that

 

[KindMaster1]

your body stores a lot of nutrients anyway, You don't need to consume 100g iron for that

All nutrients are important.
No, you don't store shit if you meet daily requirement, because it's all used up for basic surviving.

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

Da evidence!!!
View attachment 3945818

look at that subhuman dutches Must be 5'4

 

[Zeekie]

vitaminD3, K2, taurine, l carnitine, creatine, choline, EPA, DHA, vitamin A, riboflavin, B12 and more

1. Some plant foods do contain vitamin D3.
2. True, plants have zero vitamin k2.
3. Taurine is non-essential.
4. L-carnitine is non-essential.
5. Creatine is non-essential.
6. Plants do have choline.
7. Plants do have vitamin A (Beta-carotene is not vitamin A per se, but it can be converted and therefore still fulfill the RDA)
8. Plants do have B2.

Meat has some non-essential benefitial compounds for our health that we cannot find on plants, but again, those are non-essential, and if we go to those extends then tell me what fibers, non-vitamin antioxidants and flavonoids can be found on meat?

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

All nutrients are important.
No, you don't store shit if you meet daily requirement, because it's all used up for basic surviving.

except most people consume a lot more than daily need

 

[veggiedietcell]

@FlotPSL honestly, let's move it to a thread because arguing through my profile is a pain in the ass.

---

View attachment 3945373

You said... and I quote: "We rely on stomach acid not on enzymes", this essentially means "We rely on stomach acid" ; "We don't rely on enzymes". Maybe it's just nit-picking stuff, but even ignoring that, stomach acid STILL HAS ENZYMES. So, what was the point here?

---

View attachment 3945376
Your claim was that plants were not a part of the primitive human diet, right? Well the research disagrees, there are tons more you can dig up, but I'll be focusing on one article (which I will be providing below). "Dental microwear texture analysis shows within-species diet variability in fossil hominins"
View attachment 3945378

By comparing microwear textures of fossil hominins with those of living primates with known diets, the researchers linked specific microwear patterns to food types.

There's also more recent evidence of anciet humans consuming plant foods. These guys lived roughly when the ice age ended.
View attachment 3945426
View attachment 3945425

Here's another fun one, involved your beloved isotopes. Suggesting that 3 million years ago we were both consuming fruits and LEAVES, as well as animal products.
View attachment 3945432

And these guys lived just about when the ice age started. So all other primates eat fruits, nuts, seeds and leaves. Our ancestors from before the ice age ate leaves. Our ancestors after the ice age ate leaves too... And I'm like 99% sure we also ate some leaves, nuts, seeds and tubers during the ice age as well, they definitely weren't as common, but humans during that period ate them too, although since I don't have the evidence to cite, I won't be using that as a strong claim, since that's more an opinion rather than anything validated by any research I can provide (this is a jab at you if you didn't catch it, btw).

---

View attachment 3945381
If you want to talk about science, we also have to share studies, science is not made through opinions, it is done through scientific research, which is mostly shared through articles and studies. So yeah, since you claimed there were "tons" of studies validating what you said, I'd love to read some of them. Again, I'm also open to providing as much research as you'd want to validate every single one of the points I've made.

This conversation would turn pretty dull and meaningless if we simply limit ourselves to saying this and that, but never bothering to prove anything, at that point it just becomes a game of who can repeat their opinion the most, not actual "scientific talk".

---

View attachment 3945384
Again, the fact that we cannot digest fiber is what makes it good, because our gut microbiome CAN digest it, and that has net health benefits, and that aside fiber helps bowel movement. "But why aren't rock goods then?" what ? I'm not even gonna try to answer that one, I think you should have enough common sense to do it on your own, regardless, I'm convinced that had to be trolling.

Anyways, fiber is good for you! It helps cancer treatment, it benefits gut health, it even helps your heart!
View attachment 3945387
View attachment 3945390
View attachment 3945391

---

View attachment 3945392

1. I thought you were saying fruit was good? Fruits ARE plants.
2. Your body is mostly water... it won't dehydrate you if you consume a proper amount of electrolytes from your diet. Also, if tribal people didn't drink water, they'd be dead. Thankfully they do get their water from the food they eat, for example many of them drink blood, which as you may assume.. is mostly water! But I'd argue that their choice to avoid water is not a pragmatic, but the fact that getting clean water as an isolated community is incredibly difficult. But if we tried to get into arguing about why water is good for you, we'd be in another crazy argument, so let's leave it at that.

---

View attachment 3945398

1. Yes, anyone making a sound argument is obviouslyyy AI, am I right?
2. "Plants have no nutritional value" this is just factually incorrect. Nutrients are ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS FOR LIFE, if you get no micronutrient intake in your diet your bodily systems would quickly degrade and you would diet. So how come people survive decades eating a plant-base diet? If your statement about plants having zero nutrition was correct, then no one that doesn't eat meat, would be alive right now.
3. Plants miss over 15 micronutrients... right... like which ones?

Lectins are bad

Do dietary lectins cause disease?: The evidence is suggestive—and raises interesting possibilities for treatment  - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

https://academic.oup.com/jimmunol/a...2/7955071?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false, https://www.precisionnutrition.com/all-about-lectins

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

1. Some plant foods do contain vitamin D3.
2. True, plants have zero vitamin k2.
3. Taurine is non-essential.
4. L-carnitine is non-essential.
5. Creatine is non-essential.
6. Plants do have choline.
7. Plants do have vitamin A (Beta-carotene is not vitamin A per se, but it can be converted and therefore still fulfill the RDA)
8. Plants do have B2.

Meat has some non-essential benefitial compounds for our health that we cannot find on plants, but again, those are non-essential, and if we go to those extends then tell me what fibers, non-vitamin antioxidants and flavonoids can be found on meat?

Why you advocating for Bhegan diet
It's Superior Balanced Diet vs Subhuman Raw Carnivore

 

[Zeekie]

All nutrients are important.
No, you don't store shit if you meet daily requirement, because it's all used up for basic surviving.

"Minerals are not proper measure of nutrition."
"All nutrients are important"

 

[FlotPSL]

look at that subhuman dutches Must be 5'4
View attachment 3945832

Why is everyone hyping up the dutch as some giants,or swedes as the most attractive people on earth

JFL these countries are all getting invaded by browns and they talk about superiority

 

[juggingfent]

man made vegetables

 

[gooner23]

tbh i think diet in general a little overrated, not everything needs to be nutrient dense can just eat a larger variety to cover it and thats kinda why supplements exist, ive had heavy processed sugary food diets and mcdonalds dirty bulk in both my blood tests i had like 0 deficiencies and 0 hormonal problems

 

[veggiedietcell]

1. Some plant foods do contain vitamin D3.
2. True, plants have zero vitamin k2.
3. Taurine is non-essential.
4. L-carnitine is non-essential.
5. Creatine is non-essential.
6. Plants do have choline.
7. Plants do have vitamin A (Beta-carotene is not vitamin A per se, but it can be converted and therefore still fulfill the RDA)
8. Plants do have B2.

Meat has some non-essential benefitial compounds for our health that we cannot find on plants, but again, those are non-essential, and if we go to those extends then tell me what fibers, non-vitamin antioxidants and flavonoids can be found on meat?

Vitamin D3 present in plants is so insufficient.
Plants having choline is literally like bare minimum amt.
creatine, taurine, l carnitine though non essential, it has real good benefits, they are anti inflammatory, better brain function
Vitamin A? 50 percent of humans cannot convert beta carotene to vitamin A efficiently.
Plants dont have B12 lmao.

Fiber is unnecessary, plants antioxidants act as pro oxidants in humans, flavonoids are proven carcinogenic and toxic

@PrimalPlasty

 

[HighIQ ubermensch]

Vitamin D3 present in plants is so insufficient.
Plants having choline is literally like bare minimum amt.
creatine, taurine, l carnitine though non essential, it has real good benefits, they are anti inflammatory, better brain function

You're a smart guy, I totally agree
I would even go as far as supplementing these rather than just consuming them in food (not taurine,carnitine) tho

Vitamin A? 50 percent of humans cannot convert beta carotene to vitamin A efficiently.

bullshit

Plants dont have B12 lmao.

Fiber is unnecessary

hell nah

 

[Arbuscular]

How were hunter gatherers eating plants tho? Them niggas instead of hunting were looking at the ground and thinking "Muh this plant looks so delicious!"?

 

[Zeekie]

Lectins are bad

Do dietary lectins cause disease?: The evidence is suggestive—and raises interesting possibilities for treatment  - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

https://academic.oup.com/jimmunol/a...2/7955071?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false, https://www.precisionnutrition.com/all-about-lectins

1. STUDY #1: This study claims that not everyone is affected by lectins, that it is mostly a problem under certain conditions and that lectins have potential benefits and there are ways to mitigate the risks associated with them.
2. STUDY #2: So this study is more mechanistic, it shows how lectins could trigger inflammation but doesn’t prove that eating normal amounts of lectins will definitely cause inflammatory diseases in everyone.
3. STUDY #3: This is the most interesting of the bunch and I'll give you a few qoutes from it:
   1. “Who’s right? Both. Neither. As with most nutrition debates, the answers are nuanced.”
   2. “As it turns out, most people need not wage a dietary war on this compound. But people with food-related sensitivities… may benefit from low-lectin (or even lectin-free) diets.”
   3. “Humans can’t digest lectins. These compounds usually pass through our digestive system unchanged. Occasionally, however, if someone’s digestive system is impaired… lectins sneak their way into the bloodstream. It’s there that lectins can cause problems."
   4. “Because lectins can trigger an immune response, they have been linked to autoimmune inflammatory conditions… However, not much is known about the mechanisms that underlie these associations, so it’s not fair to imply that lectins can cause, or even aggravate, chronic inflammatory conditions.”
   5. “For most healthy individuals, foods that are properly prepared won’t cause any problems.”
   6. “Even if you do accidentally eat some undercooked kidney beans, lectins usually only cause short-term inflammation and symptoms… after that, you should be fine.”

So yeah, lectins under certain conditions and when not consumed in the right quantities can be bad, but as 3 of the studies say in some capacity, this is only situationally an issue and soaking, cooking and sprouting (which majority of people do) make it a non-issue in the majority of cases. No one eats legumes raw.

Also let's look at the counterevidence, legumes are associated with major positive health outcomes like a lower risk of cardiovascular diseases, type 2 diabetes, and certain types of cancer.

Legumes: A Vehicle for Transition to Sustainability - PubMed

Legumes are an excellent source of protein and have been used in the human diet for centuries. Consumption of legumes has been linked to several health benefits, including a lower risk of cardiovascular diseases, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and certain types of cancer, while legumes' high fiber...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Nutritional and health benefits of dried beans - PubMed

Dried beans (often referred to as grain legumes) may contribute to some of the health benefits associated with plant-based diets. Beans are rich in a number of important micronutrients, including potassium, magnesium, folate, iron, and zinc, and are important sources of protein in vegetarian...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Health Benefits of Plant-Based Nutrition: Focus on Beans in Cardiometabolic Diseases - PubMed

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death worldwide, claiming over 650,000 American lives annually. Typically not a singular disease, CVD often coexists with dyslipidemia, hypertension, type-2 diabetes (T2D), chronic system-wide inflammation, and obesity. Obesity, an independent...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Legumes-A Comprehensive Exploration of Global Food-Based Dietary Guidelines and Consumption - PubMed

Despite the well-known human and planetary health benefits of legumes, consumption is often low. This scoping review aimed to evaluate the inclusion of legumes in global food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG), and to review consumption data against global food group classifications for legumes...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Zeekie]

Vitamin D3 present in plants is so insufficient.

I'll give you that.

Plants having choline is literally like bare minimum amt.

But they do have it.

creatine, taurine, l carnitine though non essential, it has real good benefits, they are anti inflammatory, better brain function

Oh... like phytochemicals in vegetables?

Vitamin A? 50 percent of humans cannot convert beta carotene to vitamin A efficiently.

Bullshit, that came from a study done on British women, majority of them didn't even report issues with beta-carotene conversion. And the fact that they cannot convert it efficiently doesn't mean they convert it at all, they're still converting over 40% of it in active retinol, which contributes to their RDA. The same findings have also not been shown to be true in men.

Plants dont have B12 lmao.

Plants don't have B12, but I never said that. I said they have vitamin B2! Which is also known as riboflavin, the one you were talking about.

Fiber is unnecessary

But has positive health benefits? Just like creatine, taurine and l carnitine.

plants antioxidants act as pro oxidants in humans, flavonoids are proven carcinogenic and toxic

Excellent, do you have any sources to validate this claims and any way to counter the heaps of scientific research disagreeing with you here?

 

[Zeekie]

How were hunter gatherers eating plants tho? Them niggas instead of hunting were looking at the ground and thinking "Muh this plant looks so delicious!"?

Hunter... "GATHERERS", and yes, they were eating plant, that's what the evidence shows.

 

[Zeekie]

tbh i think diet in general a little overrated, not everything needs to be nutrient dense can just eat a larger variety to cover it and thats kinda why supplements exist, ive had heavy processed sugary food diets and mcdonalds dirty bulk in both my blood tests i had like 0 deficiencies and 0 hormonal problems

woah woah dude, let's take it one step at a time, we don't wanna scare the primal diet crowd here

 

[sub5mumbaifinalboss]

@FlotPSL honestly, let's move it to a thread because arguing through my profile is a pain in the ass.

---

View attachment 3945373

You said... and I quote: "We rely on stomach acid not on enzymes", this essentially means "We rely on stomach acid" ; "We don't rely on enzymes". Maybe it's just nit-picking stuff, but even ignoring that, stomach acid STILL HAS ENZYMES. So, what was the point here?

---

View attachment 3945376
Your claim was that plants were not a part of the primitive human diet, right? Well the research disagrees, there are tons more you can dig up, but I'll be focusing on one article (which I will be providing below). "Dental microwear texture analysis shows within-species diet variability in fossil hominins"
View attachment 3945378

By comparing microwear textures of fossil hominins with those of living primates with known diets, the researchers linked specific microwear patterns to food types.

There's also more recent evidence of anciet humans consuming plant foods. These guys lived roughly when the ice age ended.
View attachment 3945426
View attachment 3945425

Here's another fun one, involved your beloved isotopes. Suggesting that 3 million years ago we were both consuming fruits and LEAVES, as well as animal products.
View attachment 3945432

And these guys lived just about when the ice age started. So all other primates eat fruits, nuts, seeds and leaves. Our ancestors from before the ice age ate leaves. Our ancestors after the ice age ate leaves too... And I'm like 99% sure we also ate some leaves, nuts, seeds and tubers during the ice age as well, they definitely weren't as common, but humans during that period ate them too, although since I don't have the evidence to cite, I won't be using that as a strong claim, since that's more an opinion rather than anything validated by any research I can provide (this is a jab at you if you didn't catch it, btw).

---

View attachment 3945381
If you want to talk about science, we also have to share studies, science is not made through opinions, it is done through scientific research, which is mostly shared through articles and studies. So yeah, since you claimed there were "tons" of studies validating what you said, I'd love to read some of them. Again, I'm also open to providing as much research as you'd want to validate every single one of the points I've made.

This conversation would turn pretty dull and meaningless if we simply limit ourselves to saying this and that, but never bothering to prove anything, at that point it just becomes a game of who can repeat their opinion the most, not actual "scientific talk".

---

View attachment 3945384
Again, the fact that we cannot digest fiber is what makes it good, because our gut microbiome CAN digest it, and that has net health benefits, and that aside fiber helps bowel movement. "But why aren't rock goods then?" what ? I'm not even gonna try to answer that one, I think you should have enough common sense to do it on your own, regardless, I'm convinced that had to be trolling.

Anyways, fiber is good for you! It helps cancer treatment, it benefits gut health, it even helps your heart!
View attachment 3945387
View attachment 3945390
View attachment 3945391

---

View attachment 3945392

1. I thought you were saying fruit was good? Fruits ARE plants.
2. Your body is mostly water... it won't dehydrate you if you consume a proper amount of electrolytes from your diet. Also, if tribal people didn't drink water, they'd be dead. Thankfully they do get their water from the food they eat, for example many of them drink blood, which as you may assume.. is mostly water! But I'd argue that their choice to avoid water is not a pragmatic, but the fact that getting clean water as an isolated community is incredibly difficult. But if we tried to get into arguing about why water is good for you, we'd be in another crazy argument, so let's leave it at that.

---

View attachment 3945398

1. Yes, anyone making a sound argument is obviouslyyy AI, am I right?
2. "Plants have no nutritional value" this is just factually incorrect. Nutrients are ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS FOR LIFE, if you get no micronutrient intake in your diet your bodily systems would quickly degrade and you would diet. So how come people survive decades eating a plant-base diet? If your statement about plants having zero nutrition was correct, then no one that doesn't eat meat, would be alive right now.
3. Plants miss over 15 micronutrients... right... like which ones?

b-but oxatales are gonna interfere my bones by blocking calcium absortion

 

[PrimalPlasty]

Vitamin D3 present in plants is so insufficient.
Plants having choline is literally like bare minimum amt.
creatine, taurine, l carnitine though non essential, it has real good benefits, they are anti inflammatory, better brain function
Vitamin A? 50 percent of humans cannot convert beta carotene to vitamin A efficiently.
Plants dont have B12 lmao.

Fiber is unnecessary, plants antioxidants act as pro oxidants in humans, flavonoids are proven carcinogenic and toxic

@PrimalPlasty

what he said ⬆⬆⬆

 

[Zeekie]

I'll give you that.

But they do have it.

Oh... like phytochemicals in vegetables?

Bullshit, that came from a study done on British women, majority of them didn't even report issues with beta-carotene conversion. And the fact that they cannot convert it efficiently doesn't mean they convert it at all, they're still converting over 40% of it in active retinol, which contributes to their RDA. The same findings have also not been shown to be true in men.


Plants don't have B12, but I never said that. I said they have vitamin B2! Which is also known as riboflavin, the one you were talking about.


But has positive health benefits? Just like creatine, taurine and l carnitine.
View attachment 3945891

Excellent, do you have any sources to validate this claims and any way to counter the heaps of scientific research disagreeing with you here?

@PrimalPlasty what I said!!!

 

[PrimalPlasty]

@PrimalPlasty what I said!!!

 

[Zeekie]

View attachment 3945939

Retards use conspiracy theories and echo chambers. High IQ people can actually read and understand the nature of scientific research.

If all of humanity thought like you we would be stuck in the stone ages.

 

[PrimalPlasty]

Retards use conspiracy theories and echo chambers. High IQ people can actually read and understand the nature of scientific research.

If all of humanity thought like you we would be stuck in the stone ages.
View attachment 3945948

people in the stone age with no studies/technological and theoretical advancements were 11235x times happier than you, new studies show...