Must watch this video if you have not seen it

[iblamemano]

If you have not watched this video from Goatis, its a must watch, I do know its seven months old but its really informative and shows how if you think that its over because of your parents genetics its really not, and if you go on to have children having good nutrition will really help them to develop more than you ever did, here is the link if you guys have not seen it.



Check it out, its a little long but worth while!

 

[ru58841]

no

 

[Schizoidcel]

 

[iblamemano]

 

[fwhr glazer]

 

[iblamemano]

lowk tru tho

 

[Schizoidcel]

 

[ybuyhgui]

Just fucking lol at this, the studies he showed were ludicrous and proved the opposite of his point. Like the cat study where their sizes were effected over multiple generations. The guy disproved his own cope about 'muh raw meat good development from birth' with actual evidence

 

[KeepCopingLads]

If you have not watched this video from Goatis, its a must watch, I do know its seven months old but its really informative and shows how if you think that its over because of your parents genetics its really not, and if you go on to have children having good nutrition will really help them to develop more than you ever did, here is the link if you guys have not seen it.



Check it out, its a little long but worth while!

already seen it
but yh agree with it

 

[KeepCopingLads]

Just fucking lol at this, the studies he showed were ludicrous and proved the opposite of his point. Like the cat study where their sizes were effected over multiple generations. The guy disproved his own cope about 'muh raw meat good development from birth' with actual evidence

i think... you're retarded or didnt watch the video.

 

[iblamemano]

Just fucking lol at this, the studies he showed were ludicrous and proved the opposite of his point. Like the cat study where their sizes were effected over multiple generations. The guy disproved his own cope about 'muh raw meat good development from birth' with actual evidence

He literally cited studies that disproved his own point. The cat study he used wasn’t proof of ‘raw meat = superior development,’ but rather showed that environmental and nutritional factors affect size over generations, not some magical benefit from raw meat at birth. If anything, it proves development is complex and not reducible to his cope narrative.

 

[iblamemano]

i think... you're retarded or didnt watch the video.

exactly lmao

 

[KeepCopingLads]

The cat study he used wasn’t proof of ‘raw meat = superior development,’ but rather showed that environmental and nutritional factors affect size over generations

this

 

[ybuyhgui]

He literally cited studies that disproved his own point. The cat study he used wasn’t proof of ‘raw meat = superior development,’ but rather showed that environmental and nutritional factors affect size over generations, not some magical benefit from raw meat at birth. If anything, it proves development is complex and not reducible to his cope narrative.

i think... you're retarded or didnt watch the video.

link a study he went over and i'll tell you why it’s completely ridiculous.

 

[KeepCopingLads]

link a study he went over and i'll tell you why it’s completely ridiculous.

i dont want to watch the video all over again, find it yourself and tag me

 

[ybuyhgui]

i dont want to watch the video all over again, find it yourself and tag me

me neither nigga especially considering there was virtually no real evidence or proper controlled studies linked that prove his point whatsoever. Honestly I was very excited to watch the video when it came out because I thought goatis might have actually used some evidence in one of his videos for a change, but no, just more pseudo science and clips of models.

 

[iblamemano]

link a study he went over and i'll tell you why it’s completely ridiculous.

The Study in Question​

Francis M. Pottenger Jr.’s experiment (1932–1942) fed cats distinctly either a raw diet (2/3 raw meat, 1/3 raw milk, plus cod-liver oil) or a cooked one. Over multiple generations, the cooked-food group showed obvious degenerative issues—reduced fertility, skeletal deformities, weaker bones, and even extinction by the fourth generation—while the raw-fed cats remained healthy across generations hare-today.comWikipedia.


This was the key “proof” used in the video to assert that “bad diet upstream has irreversible genetic damage” and that it takes four generations to reverse such effects.

 

[KeepCopingLads]

The Study in Question​

Francis M. Pottenger Jr.’s experiment (1932–1942) fed cats distinctly either a raw diet (2/3 raw meat, 1/3 raw milk, plus cod-liver oil) or a cooked one. Over multiple generations, the cooked-food group showed obvious degenerative issues—reduced fertility, skeletal deformities, weaker bones, and even extinction by the fourth generation—while the raw-fed cats remained healthy across generations hare-today.comWikipedia.


This was the key “proof” used in the video to assert that “bad diet upstream has irreversible genetic damage” and that it takes four generations to reverse such effects.

i wish i was low inhib enough to eat raw liver
@asdvek (tagging the indian)

 

[ybuyhgui]

i wish i was low inhib enough to eat raw liver
@asdvek (tagging the indian)

please don’t tag that nigga I already had an argument with him the other day jfl

 

[iblamemano]

please don’t tag that nigga I already had an argument with him the other day jfl

u gonna reply to my link lmao

 

[KeepCopingLads]

u gonna reply to my link lmao

impatient nigga
dont stress

 

[ybuyhgui]

The Study in Question​

Francis M. Pottenger Jr.’s experiment (1932–1942) fed cats distinctly either a raw diet (2/3 raw meat, 1/3 raw milk, plus cod-liver oil) or a cooked one. Over multiple generations, the cooked-food group showed obvious degenerative issues—reduced fertility, skeletal deformities, weaker bones, and even extinction by the fourth generation—while the raw-fed cats remained healthy across generations hare-today.comWikipedia.


This was the key “proof” used in the video to assert that “bad diet upstream has irreversible genetic damage” and that it takes four generations to reverse such effects.

first of all, humans and cats have completely differing digestive tracts which already renders it a redundant study, but I digress. Obviously different animals will react differently to cooked food, if you fed crocodiles a pandas natural diet of plants I have no doubt they'd struggle.

also most tribes literally cook their meat to fucking death, the hadza for example, who used to become ill from eating the raw meat that they're now afraid to eat anything but highly cooked meat

 

[KeepCopingLads]

also most tribes literally cook their meat to fucking death, the hadza for example, who used to become ill from eating the raw meat that they're now afraid to eat anything but highly cooked meat

yh, what ive noticed is that these remote tribes either always eat cooked meat or majority cook meat and a bit of raw meat on the side
an exception i guess would be the inuit people but those guys live in such cold conditions that i think the temperature keeps the bacteria or something under control (yh i may have worded that wrong)

 

[iblamemano]

first of all, humans and cats have completely differing digestive tracts which already renders it a redundant study, but I digress. Obviously different animals will react differently to cooked food, if you fed crocodiles a pandas natural diet of plants I have no doubt they'd struggle.

also most tribes literally cook their meat to fucking death, the hadza for example, who used to become ill from eating the raw meat that they're now afraid to eat anything but highly cooked meat

If cats and humans are so different that the study doesn’t apply, then why cite it as proof in the first place? You can’t use a study on obligate carnivores to argue for raw meat supremacy in humans. Also using the Hadza as an example actually destroys your point — their survival instincts made them avoid raw meat because cooking reduces pathogens and increases calories, which is exactly why humans evolved to cook food.

 

[ybuyhgui]

If cats and humans are so different that the study doesn’t apply, then why cite it as proof in the first place?

in order to show that even in cats (who's digestive tracts are extremely unadaptive compared to humans (most adaptive of any mammal)) changes in physical appearance STILL happened over multiple generations rather than the singular 'from birth' doctrine which goatis constantly defers to.

Also using the Hadza as an example actually destroys your point — their survival instincts made them avoid raw meat because cooking reduces pathogens and increases calories, which is exactly why humans evolved to cook food.

you've obviously never watched a goatis video in your life. His whole philosophy is that raw meat specifically - not cooked - is the 'natural' way of eating while the overwhelming majority of tribes cook their meat, if we use the ludicrous cat study as a basis to reach a judgement here, the tribes who have eaten the cooked meat for generations would have significantly worse overall development as opposed to the 'raw' tribes. But guess what: they look, act and perform exactly the fucking same. So why use a cat study when we have all the human evidence we could possibly need right here in the form of differing amazonian tribes who are actually human.

an exception i guess would be the inuit people but those guys live in such cold conditions that i think the temperature keeps the bacteria or something under control (yh i may have worded that wrong)

yes the common cope as to why the inuit aren’t developed despite having eaten raw meat for so long is 'muh cold bro' but i'm yet to see goatis link any genuine evidence on this. I had high hopes for his video, but a complete letdown ultimately.

 

[iblamemano]

in order to show that even in cats (who's digestive tracts are extremely unadaptive compared to humans (most adaptive of any mammal)) changes in physical appearance STILL happened over multiple generations rather than the singular 'from birth' doctrine which goatis constantly defers to.

you've obviously never watched a goatis video in your life. His whole philosophy is that raw meat specifically - not cooked - is the 'natural' way of eating while the overwhelming majority of tribes cook their meat, if we use the ludicrous cat study as a basis to reach a judgement here, the tribes who have eaten the cooked meat for generations would have significantly worse overall development as opposed to the 'raw' tribes. But guess what: they look, act and perform exactly the fucking same. So why use a cat study when we have all the human evidence we could possibly need right here in the form of differing amazonian tribes who are actually human.

yes the common cope as to why the inuit aren’t developed despite having eaten raw meat for so long is 'muh cold bro' but i'm yet to see goatis link any genuine evidence on this. I had high hopes for his video, but a complete letdown ultimately.

Ive been watching Goatis for a solid 2 years