Raw meat

iblamegenetics7681

iblamegenetics7681

ascend or get left behind
Joined
Nov 9, 2024
Posts
701
Reputation
545
i just had my first ever raw meat it was tartar 200 grams just raw out of the package i wanna start eating other raw animal food like liver for example, is there anyone that can guide me, and tell me how they went about it, im 16 years old.
 
  • +1
Reactions: it is so over, realshit, Godtis and 4 others
Sort by date Sort by votes
Asoka said:
"I don't believe in science! Look at me guys, I'm so raw and primal, me strong" :feelsuhh:
Click to expand...
Keep eating like a good goy your vegetables (it was literally food that your ancestors only ate when they couldnt Hunt for watever reason so they wouldnt die of starvation)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Joaquin said:
Holy shit just shut the fuck up you are absolutely brainwashed even if I provided facts you would deny them and btw you provided a total amount of 0 facts
Click to expand...
Asoka said:
You lose a insignificant amount of nutrients which you can easily get the RDI of by eating just 2000 calories a day. No point of "extra nutrients", plus you're risking food poisoning and harmful bacteria, and please don't say they aren't harmful because I will just prove you wrong. Eating animal food is great but there is absolutely no reason to remove fruits and vegetables ( which are natural foods ). Please stop coping and enjoy your raw cat brain :lul:
Click to expand...
....? My facts I already posted. Let's here your points against these brother. You can't because all you do is get knowledgeable from tiktok and not from actual research papers.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Joaquin said:
Keep eating like a good goy your vegetables (it was literally food that your ancestors only ate when they couldnt Hunt for watever reason so they wouldnt die of starvation)
Click to expand...
Why does it matter what are early ancestors ate anyways?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
hej1377 said:
Raw meat does fuck all, red meat is mostly fine to eat raw but your just getting meat that tastes worse and thats harder to eat to get a bit more of vitamins youre not deficient anyway

Just cook the food
Click to expand...
Taste better, easier to eat and many meat eaters are deficient in nutrients because of the degradation of cooking. Diet will not ascend most of the time, but still important so I still eat like true Adam
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Asoka said:
Why does it matter what are early ancestors ate anyways?
Click to expand...
Go to 2:30 into this video (link below) and watch the cat experiment, also Weston A. Price and many others have proven the effect of eating unnatural (not like our ancestors) effect on attractiveness, very important in children but will not change much past a sertain age so if you would like your kids to live without the blackpill, feed them natural

The Only Blackpill Video You Need to See​

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
iblamegenetics7681 said:
i just had my first ever raw meat it was tartar 200 grams just raw out of the package i wanna start eating other raw animal food like liver for example, is there anyone that can guide me, and tell me how they went about it, im 16 years old.
Click to expand...
Yeah I eat liver raw often, No guide needed just let it dethaw then get a fork scoop it out and eat it
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
WaterDog said:
Taste better, easier to eat and many meat eaters are deficient in nutrients because of the degradation of cooking. Diet will not ascend most of the time, but still important so I still eat like true Adam
Click to expand...
No the vitamins that gets degraded by heat <10% are defient in and even if it was the case that you were deficient in vitamin k or whatever it would 1 be easier and to just take a pill everyday and tou can be sure to not be deficient and 2 fixing it will do NOTHING for your looks

Macros can be important since you need protein for muscle carbs for energy

Micronutrient deficiency might have some small health drawbacks but you still probably wont feel anything and they also have smaller more specific benefits whoch in almost everycase is owrse and therefpre becomes obsolete when pharmacology exists

Natural/ancestral has just became useless buzzwords here for coping greys
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
iblamegenetics7681 said:
i just had my first ever raw meat it was tartar 200 grams just raw out of the package i wanna start eating other raw animal food like liver for example, is there anyone that can guide me, and tell me how they went about it, im 16 years old.
Click to expand...
drink raw milk too
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
hej1377 said:
No the vitamins that gets degraded by heat <10% are defient in and even if it was the case that you were deficient in vitamin k or whatever it would 1 be easier and to just take a pill everyday and tou can be sure to not be deficient and 2 fixing it will do NOTHING for your looks

Macros can be important since you need protein for muscle carbs for energy

Micronutrient deficiency might have some small health drawbacks but you still probably wont feel anything and they also have smaller more specific benefits whoch in almost everycase is owrse and therefpre becomes obsolete when pharmacology exists

Natural/ancestral has just became useless buzzwords here for coping greys
Click to expand...
bror det du siger lige nu er cope
 
  • +1
Reactions: WaterDog
Upvote 0 Downvote
hej1377 said:
No the vitamins that gets degraded by heat <10% are defient in and even if it was the case that you were deficient in vitamin k or whatever it would 1 be easier and to just take a pill everyday and tou can be sure to not be deficient and 2 fixing it will do NOTHING for your looks

Macros can be important since you need protein for muscle carbs for energy

Micronutrient deficiency might have some small health drawbacks but you still probably wont feel anything and they also have smaller more specific benefits whoch in almost everycase is owrse and therefpre becomes obsolete when pharmacology exists

Natural/ancestral has just became useless buzzwords here for coping greys
Click to expand...
I am sure your children and bloodline will be very grateful of your knowledge
 
  • JFL
Reactions: iblamegenetics7681
Upvote 0 Downvote
hej1377 said:
Raw meat does fuck all, red meat is mostly fine to eat raw but your just getting meat that tastes worse and thats harder to eat to get a bit more of vitamins youre not deficient anyway

Just cook the food
Click to expand...
B12 is %100 destroyed
 
  • +1
Reactions: WaterDog and iblamegenetics7681
Upvote 0 Downvote
asdvek said:
B12 is %100 destroyed
Click to expand...
No,a lot is lost if you use a method like boiling,like 90% very little is lost if you use a method liek frying, especially if use the meat juice, and i dont know what idiot would boil liver or sumthing like that,sounds disgusting

B2 is also found in other sources like mishrooms and some vegetables

B2 deficiency also just makes you a jit dry and pretty much every vitamin pill cointsins more than enough of it so raw meat is just a stupid,low roi ineficient method
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
iblamegenetics7681 said:
i just had my first ever raw meat it was tartar 200 grams just raw out of the package i wanna start eating other raw animal food like liver for example, is there anyone that can guide me, and tell me how they went about it, im 16 years old.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
hej1377 said:
No,a lot is lost if you use a method like boiling,like 90% very little is lost if you use a method liek frying, especially if use the meat juice, and i dont know what idiot would boil liver or sumthing like that,sounds disgusting
Click to expand...
no retard

any type of heat kills b12

its very heat sensitive
 
  • +1
Reactions: WaterDog
Upvote 0 Downvote
iblamegenetics7681 said:
i just had my first ever raw meat it was tartar 200 grams just raw out of the package i wanna start eating other raw animal food like liver for example, is there anyone that can guide me, and tell me how they went about it, im 16 years old.
Click to expand...
look up dontaskformarcus on tt
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
WaterDog said:
Go to 2:30 into this video (link below) and watch the cat experiment, also Weston A. Price and many others have proven the effect of eating unnatural (not like our ancestors) effect on attractiveness, very important in children but will not change much past a sertain age so if you would like your kids to live without the blackpill, feed them natural

The Only Blackpill Video You Need to See​

Click to expand...

First thing, this is done in cats not fucking humans retard. Second, feeding sugar in the cooked/pasteurised group Vs the raw group is an unfair comparison. Third, even if this was run in humans and done fairly since birth, it would look at actual biomarkers and not how attractive someone looks
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Asoka said:
First thing, this is done in cats not fucking humans retard. Second, feeding sugar in the cooked/pasteurised group Vs the raw group is an unfair comparison. Third, even if this was run in humans and done fairly since birth, it would look at actual biomarkers and not how attractive someone looks
Click to expand...
It has been done In humans and it is the reason you have joined this website. Weston A. Price has proven this
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Asoka said:
show me actual good proof that raw meat is healthier for humans than cooked, go ahead. Link some studies
Click to expand...
You have the burden of proof, not me. You’re the one arguing that humans should abandon what we are biologically designed for. That’s debate 101, the one pushing for an unnatural deviation carries the weight of evidence.

Cooking is nothing more than a cultural invention. Raw food is the evolutionary baseline, the state in which human physiology developed for millions of years. If you now claim that humans must cook their food to be healthy, you are making the extraordinary claim, and extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

Think about it: if someone claimed that cows shouldn’t eat grass, who would have the burden of proof? Not the person pointing out that grass is their natural diet, but the one insisting they abandon it. Your argument is no different, it assumes that transforming food through heat somehow improves what nature already optimized. That’s on you to prove, not me.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
WaterDog said:
You have the burden of proof, not me. You’re the one arguing that humans should abandon what we are biologically designed for. That’s debate 101, the one pushing for an unnatural deviation carries the weight of evidence.

Cooking is nothing more than a cultural invention. Raw food is the evolutionary baseline, the state in which human physiology developed for millions of years. If you now claim that humans must cook their food to be healthy, you are making the extraordinary claim, and extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

Think about it: if someone claimed that cows shouldn’t eat grass, who would have the burden of proof? Not the person pointing out that grass is their natural diet, but the one insisting they abandon it. Your argument is no different, it assumes that transforming food through heat somehow improves what nature already optimized. That’s on you to prove, not me.
Click to expand...

WaterDog said:
You have the burden of proof, not me. You’re the one arguing that humans should abandon what we are biologically designed for. That’s debate 101, the one pushing for an unnatural deviation carries the weight of evidence.

Cooking is nothing more than a cultural invention. Raw food is the evolutionary baseline, the state in which human physiology developed for millions of years. If you now claim that humans must cook their food to be healthy, you are making the extraordinary claim, and extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

Think about it: if someone claimed that cows shouldn’t eat grass, who would have the burden of proof? Not the person pointing out that grass is their natural diet, but the one insisting they abandon it. Your argument is no different, it assumes that transforming food through heat somehow improves what nature already optimized. That’s on you to prove, not me.
Click to expand...
Fine if you want to go there I will provide evidence, just try and dismiss it.

Carmody, R. N., Weintraub, G. S., & Wrangham, R. W. (2011). "Energetic consequences of thermal and nonthermal food processing."
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Aiello, L. C., & Wheeler, P. (1995). "The Expensive-Tissue Hypothesis:
The Brain and the Digestive System in Human and Primate Evolution." Current Anthropology.
Perry, J. M. et al. (2016). "Genetic Evidence of Human Adaptation to a Cooked Diet." Genome Biology and Evolution.
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Food Safety guidelines.

If you can't think of anything truly logical to say, stay quiet :lul:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Asoka said:
Fine if you want to go there I will provide evidence, just try and dismiss it.

Carmody, R. N., Weintraub, G. S., & Wrangham, R. W. (2011). "Energetic consequences of thermal and nonthermal food processing."
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Aiello, L. C., & Wheeler, P. (1995). "The Expensive-Tissue Hypothesis:
The Brain and the Digestive System in Human and Primate Evolution." Current Anthropology.
Perry, J. M. et al. (2016). "Genetic Evidence of Human Adaptation to a Cooked Diet." Genome Biology and Evolution.
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Food Safety guidelines.

If you can't think of anything truly logical to say, stay quiet :lul:
Click to expand...
All 4 of your sources are bottom of the evidence hierarchy.

Carmody 2011 is a mouse lab test about calories from starch, not about human health. More calories available does not equal more vitality.

Aiello 1995 is literally just a hypothesis, not real data.

Perry 2016 only shows tolerance to cooking, not that it is superior. Adaptation is not the same as optimization.

CDC guidelines are just political pamphlets for mass safety, not science.

None of these actually prove that cooked meat is healthier than raw meat. You still have not posted a single RCT or meta-analysis in humans showing cooked > raw. Until then you are just coping with low tier evidence and government handouts.

Next time take your time to read your "evidence":lul: through before citing it, and also take the evidence hierarchy into consideration before literally using food safety guidelines as evidence :feelsuhh: while not showing any respect haha.

Next up you could maybe adress these studies (Physiology, Human anthropology, Nutrient biochemistry):
  • Human gastric acid is pH 1–2, same as scavengers, clearly adapted for raw meat (Beasley 2015).
  • Weston Price showed entire human populations with perfect teeth/jaws on ancestral diets, degeneration in ONE generation after switching to cooked/processed foods (Price 1939).
  • Heat destroys key vitamins like B12 and folate, proven in controlled studies (Bito 2018).

Let us see who will stay quiet first, and btw this debate has been won by raw meat advocates plenty of times so the earlie you forfeit the less humiliating it will be and maybe you could understand the effects of eating in accordance to your evolutionary specialization and that you will not build a scull without the materials.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
WaterDog said:
All 4 of your sources are bottom of the evidence hierarchy.

Carmody 2011 is a mouse lab test about calories from starch, not about human health. More calories available does not equal more vitality.

Aiello 1995 is literally just a hypothesis, not real data.

Perry 2016 only shows tolerance to cooking, not that it is superior. Adaptation is not the same as optimization.

CDC guidelines are just political pamphlets for mass safety, not science.

None of these actually prove that cooked meat is healthier than raw meat. You still have not posted a single RCT or meta-analysis in humans showing cooked > raw. Until then you are just coping with low tier evidence and government handouts.

Next time take your time to read your "evidence":lul: through before citing it, and also take the evidence hierarchy into consideration before literally using food safety guidelines as evidence :feelsuhh: while not showing any respect haha.

Next up you could maybe adress these studies (Physiology, Human anthropology, Nutrient biochemistry):
  • Human gastric acid is pH 1–2, same as scavengers, clearly adapted for raw meat (Beasley 2015).
  • Weston Price showed entire human populations with perfect teeth/jaws on ancestral diets, degeneration in ONE generation after switching to cooked/processed foods (Price 1939).
  • Heat destroys key vitamins like B12 and folate, proven in controlled studies (Bito 2018).

Let us see who will stay quiet first, and btw this debate has been won by raw meat advocates plenty of times so the earlie you forfeit the less humiliating it will be and maybe you could understand the effects of eating in accordance to your evolutionary specialization and that you will not build a scull without the materials.
Click to expand...
Sure, the studies aren't going to exam raw meat eaters against cooked meat eaters, because they are hardly and fucking retards who eat raw meat because of safety issues. And don't say raw meat has risk of giving food poisoning, because you would be blatantly lying to yourself. The pH in our stomachs does mean we used to eat raw meat, but that doesn't matter. We evolved from eating foods and water with lots of pathogenic bacteria but our body's simply can't handle it now, it's a known fact. The whole point of nutrients being lost when cooked is irrelevant. We absorb more micro & macro nutrients as well as calories when are food is cooked,
-
"Thermal processing implications on the digestibility of meat, fish and seafood proteins" (2021)
-
"The influence of cooking and fat trimming on the actual nutrient intake from meat" (Gerber et al., 2009)
-
And the study used from 1939 is stupid bro. Use your brain. Of course when they switched from a meat based diet to a modern western diet with candy and chips will make their dental and orthodontic health worst.

The raw meat diet is better than a modern day diet but let's be real. You only do this diet to try and act different. You're lonely and have no other interests so you have to listen to a man on the internet who is wanted for splashing someone with acid. Respond to the research before defending yourself first though please 🥺
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You want me to respond to the research first so here you go:
btw next time you should maybe read the research yourself before using it because you clearly can't read if you genuinely use this as evidence.

1. "Thermal processing implications on the digestibility of meat, fish and seafood proteins" (2021)
This review shows that different cooking methods induce different changes, the majority of cooking methods inducing negative changes. I would argue that this study is useless because 1. everyone should have to use a sous vide as mentioned in the review, and 2. partial unfolding or exposure of cleavage sites in proteins would not make up for the losses in nutrients that happen when coking them and is totally useless, also prove that cooked meat increase digestibility? This review proves that cooking induces unfavourable changes, such as protein aggregation, severe oxidation, cross linking or increased disulfide (S-S) content and decrease the susceptibility of proteins during gastrointestinal digestion.

2. "The influence of cooking and fat trimming on the actual nutrient intake from meat" (Gerber et al., 2009)
This is a quote from your study "All vitamins decreased during cooking" are you fucking dumb? read your bullshit before wasting my time. "Calcium, sodium, potassium, magnesium and phosphorus decreased during cooking in all cuts and cooking processes, while iron and zinc were found to increase in beef." How the fuck does that prove your point, which if you forgot your point is that cooked meat is healthier than raw meat, so if the nutrient loss is not enough proof that raw is healthier then I will gladly wait.

And again read your evidence before sending it because this is just embarrassing. And also learn argumentation. Terms such as "it's a known fact" doesn't prove anything? its a known fact that I fucked your mom.

Why do you claim I "do this diet to try and act different"? you don't know if I eat this way and I don't usually tell people about it unless they ask me, just like I don't talk to people about working out or other shit that people don't want to hear og talk about. It is funny that you make all of these personal attacks it really shows how chemically imbalanced and easily influenced you are, I own you. Also proves you a fucking idiot because you are personally connected to you belief which is why you act so soy about it instead of accepting your life is a lie and understanding how to act with the new information.

So far you have proven that cooking often makes food worse. Your own sources show that thermal processing causes nutrient losses, vitamin destruction, mineral reduction and in many cases lower digestibility due to aggregation and oxidation of proteins. Gerber 2009 literally says all vitamins decreased during cooking. The 2021 review admits high heat and long cooking make proteins less digestible. At best you have proven that mild methods like sous vide might help in some cases, but you have not shown cooked meat is healthier overall.

You still have not produced a single randomized human trial or meta analysis that shows cooked meat beats raw or fermented animal foods on real outcomes like development, dental arches, jaw growth or even long term health. Until then your position is built on selective reading and rhetoric, not on high level evidence.

Just give up you know you are wrong this debate has been won so many times by raw meat advocates it is not worth it
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
WaterDog said:
You want me to respond to the research first so here you go:
btw next time you should maybe read the research yourself before using it because you clearly can't read if you genuinely use this as evidence.

1. "Thermal processing implications on the digestibility of meat, fish and seafood proteins" (2021)
This review shows that different cooking methods induce different changes, the majority of cooking methods inducing negative changes. I would argue that this study is useless because 1. everyone should have to use a sous vide as mentioned in the review, and 2. partial unfolding or exposure of cleavage sites in proteins would not make up for the losses in nutrients that happen when coking them and is totally useless, also prove that cooked meat increase digestibility? This review proves that cooking induces unfavourable changes, such as protein aggregation, severe oxidation, cross linking or increased disulfide (S-S) content and decrease the susceptibility of proteins during gastrointestinal digestion.

2. "The influence of cooking and fat trimming on the actual nutrient intake from meat" (Gerber et al., 2009)
This is a quote from your study "All vitamins decreased during cooking" are you fucking dumb? read your bullshit before wasting my time. "Calcium, sodium, potassium, magnesium and phosphorus decreased during cooking in all cuts and cooking processes, while iron and zinc were found to increase in beef." How the fuck does that prove your point, which if you forgot your point is that cooked meat is healthier than raw meat, so if the nutrient loss is not enough proof that raw is healthier then I will gladly wait.

And again read your evidence before sending it because this is just embarrassing. And also learn argumentation. Terms such as "it's a known fact" doesn't prove anything? its a known fact that I fucked your mom.

Why do you claim I "do this diet to try and act different"? you don't know if I eat this way and I don't usually tell people about it unless they ask me, just like I don't talk to people about working out or other shit that people don't want to hear og talk about. It is funny that you make all of these personal attacks it really shows how chemically imbalanced and easily influenced you are, I own you. Also proves you a fucking idiot because you are personally connected to you belief which is why you act so soy about it instead of accepting your life is a lie and understanding how to act with the new information.

So far you have proven that cooking often makes food worse. Your own sources show that thermal processing causes nutrient losses, vitamin destruction, mineral reduction and in many cases lower digestibility due to aggregation and oxidation of proteins. Gerber 2009 literally says all vitamins decreased during cooking. The 2021 review admits high heat and long cooking make proteins less digestible. At best you have proven that mild methods like sous vide might help in some cases, but you have not shown cooked meat is healthier overall.

You still have not produced a single randomized human trial or meta analysis that shows cooked meat beats raw or fermented animal foods on real outcomes like development, dental arches, jaw growth or even long term health. Until then your position is built on selective reading and rhetoric, not on high level evidence.

Just give up you know you are wrong this debate has been won so many times by raw meat advocates it is not worth it
Click to expand...
wow what a comeback, might have touched a few nerves there. If you stayed in school and didn't believe that it's a "slave" activity you might understand what the point is.

Yes nutrients are lost when cooking meat, general knowledge you learn. But it becomes more bioavailable in some nutrients which is something you refuse to accept.

Even in the nutrients where it's reduced and doesn't become significantly more bioavailable, you can easily just eat a couple calories worth of food to get the nutrients that you lost.

You failed to address bacteria which is why people don't eat raw meat. Because it is unsafe, and you risk getting food poisoning and illness.

And again, dental health and orthodontics are obviously better in meat eaters than a western diet.

Im not saying cooked meat is significantly healthier, it's more the case of safety & risk.

Are you reading anything I'm fucking saying, there are no large RCT or meta analysis on raw meat Vs Cooked meat. Because it's extremely dangerous to eat raw meat. Please stop repeating the same point over and over again without addressing bacteria risk and the insignificant problem of less nutrients.

You have been severely brainwashed, please get better.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
  • Question
Raw meat
Replies
27
Views
592
hej1377
H
izco.san
how to start eating raw things?
Replies
22
Views
236
Dastan
Dastan
d0wnpour_
Discussion fixing my diet - advice?
Replies
4
Views
155
firedpotato
firedpotato
jaco
JFL I ate toxic supermarket raw liver
Replies
32
Views
531
jaco
jaco
Y
  • Question
Looksmax Looking for advice
Replies
11
Views
150
iblamemycuriousity
iblamemycuriousity

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (Looksmaxers: 0, Bluepillers: 3)
Back
Top