ey88
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2024
- Posts
- 27,262
- Reputation
- 59,484
You should listen to human biology
It makes so much more sense
It makes so much more sense
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
No it doesn’tIdk about that one.
My biology wants kfc everyday
nohuman biology says you should eat cooked meat
we evolved hands and brains to use tools such as fire for tasks like cooking food
Did you see it happenwe evolved hands and brains to use tools such as fire for tasks like cooking food
How?human biology says you should eat cooked meat
we didnt evolve hands to use fire, we evolved them to use tools for huntingwe evolved hands and brains to use tools such as fire for tasks like cooking food
fuark thats wiseNo it doesn’t
Your neurochemistry does
We actually evolved to be able to eat raw meathuman biology says you should eat cooked meat
while we initially evolved them to use stone tools we couldn't of used fire in the way we did with out that evolution. plus our large brains wouldn't of have been possible with out the extra nutrients we get from cookingwe didnt evolve hands to use fire, we evolved them to use tools for hunting
wrong some bacteria have adapted to survive and can easily make your very sickWe actually evolved to be able to eat raw meat
That’s why we have such acidic stomach acid
We have stomach acid with a pH that of a facultative scavenger
You gotta be joking dudeextra nutrients we get from cooking
it makes more nutrients bioavailable and be absorbed during digestion compared to raw meatYou gotta be joking dude
Cooking just makes it easier to get more calories
But it destroys many nutrients
you believe this despite the vitamins being destroyed during cooking?while we initially evolved them to use stone tools we couldn't of used fire in the way we did with out that evolution. plus our large brains wouldn't of have been possible with out the extra nutrients we get from cooking
not true, even some of the fat is lostit makes more nutrients bioavailable and be absorbed during digestion compared to raw meat
did i say that some nutrients where not destroyed during cooking? i said they become more bio bioavailable which they doyou believe this despite the vitamins being destroyed during cooking?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22063975/
the whole idea that cooking food allowed us to grow bigger brains is just speculation
there are more nutrients being destroyed than there are nutrients that become more bioavailable. protein and some minerals become more bioavailable but thats itdid i say that some nutrients where not destroyed during cooking? i said they become more bio bioavailable which they do
inb4 you mention scurvy, raw meat has vitamin c whereas cooked meat doesntdid i say that some nutrients where not destroyed during cooking? i said they become more bio bioavailable which they do
protein, fat, B2, iron, zinc, fatty acids and cholesterol where all significantly higher while only b6 and b1 are lower according to an analysis done on south African muttonthere are more nutrients being destroyed than there are nutrients that become more bioavailable. protein and some minerals become more bioavailable but thats it
the amount in muscle meet is negligible and i know you are not eating raw liver and brain. plus you can literally get vitamin c from other sources such as an orangesinb4 you mention scurvy, raw meat has vitamin c whereas cooked meat doesnt
Can you link the study, I want to see somethingprotein, fat, B2, iron, zinc, fatty acids and cholesterol where all significantly higher while only b6 and b1 are lower according to an analysis done on south African mutton
View attachment 3408516
the amount in muscle meet is negligible and i know you are not eating raw liver and brain. plus you can literally get vitamin c from other sources such as an oranges
Can you link the study, I want to see something
“Table 1. Mean values of the nutrient composition for raw and cooked 100 g meat portion of South African C2 mutton.”
they would mean 100g before it was cooked like normal, like a Quarter Pounder patty is only a quarter pound before cooking or how they advertise steaks on menus weight as before cooked“Table 1. Mean values of the nutrient composition for raw and cooked 100 g meat portion of South African C2 mutton.”
Bro
The only reason they found an “increase” in protein and minerals is because cooking meat makes it lose mass
Water and fat is released
So the minerals that don’t get destroyed will appear as more per 100 g
Maybe I’m missing something, but idk
How do you know though? Does it say that?they would mean 100g before it was cooked like normal, like a Quarter Pounder patty is only a quarter pound before cooking or how they advertise steaks on menus weight as before cooked
becuase that's how meat is measured also they said they used the same 100g cuts for both and compared them not comparing 100g cooked meat to 100g raw meatHow do you know though? Does it say that?
Yes, goatis showed that exact study to prove raw has more nutrients and this dumbass nigga is posting it“Table 1. Mean values of the nutrient composition for raw and cooked 100 g meat portion of South African C2 mutton.”
Bro
The only reason they found an “increase” in protein and minerals is because cooking meat makes it lose mass
Water and fat is released
So the minerals that don’t get destroyed will appear as more per 100 g
Maybe I’m missing something, but idk
they said they are comparing the same 100g cuts of meat not comparing 100g cooked meat to 100g raw meat you pea brained retardYes, goatis showed that exact study to prove raw has more nutrients and this dumbass nigga is posting it
they said they are comparing the same 100g cuts of meat not comparing 100g cooked meat to 100g raw meat you pea brained retard
Watch at 2:30 monkey nigger
How would protein magically appear from cooking?when they say 100g of chicken parts they mean the raw weight you money brained nigger, if they where comparing 100g of cooked meat to a 100g of raw meat they would of said that instead
i want to literally throw acid and burn that fucking dumb psychotic welfare leach dead beat dad grifter like he wanted to happen to his child
that's literally what they meanabout how much protein is digested but I don’t even think that’s the case
that's literally what they mean
Thoughts?From your study
“Jamora and Rhee (1998) emphasises that cooking lead to moisture loss and thus an
increase in concentration of some nutrient and decrease in heat-labile nutrients”
“Jamora and Rhee (1998) emphasises that cooking lead to moisture loss and thus an
increase in concentration of some nutrient and decrease in heat-labile nutrients”
concentration dosent mean increase in nutrients, like you said before the weight/volume of the meat would go down becuase of moisture lost. they also said used the same 100g portions of meat for bothThoughts?