Have you guy seen this documentary?

...

sounds more like a political documentary than a health one, but might be worth watching then.. 'optimal-diet' is in most cases about morality and goals than real health-benefits..

The setup is a bit obnoxious with the protagonist/narrator "discovering" the "truth" bit by bit and coming to the result that a plant-based diet is the best one. But it's one of the better documentaries, I especially like the point about the health organisations being obviously and openly corrupt.

Those are not cherry picked, those are general disadvantages of the diet. They still are as valid as yours, though yours often have more active than the usual sample sizes, who do more sports.

Besides, the deficiences arise from the fact that most people who enter this diet cannot sufficiently, or do not want to sufficiently supplement themselves. Maybe their lives are too busy, maybe they are too cheap to get supplements, maybe they are just dumb.

In a similar way, I also added the american heart assosiation standard chart for the fact that you cannot expect people to properly keep at at diet and keep track of their macros. Basically telling the retards not to eat of something will probably be easier for them to comprehend it than anything else.

>42080613

1) regular milk is even higher in phyloestrogenqs so you should just give up dairy
2)animal protein is just a insulinogenic as starches so you should get your protein from plant sources

One of the major black swan events, that I suspect is that play here. Is this

Humans evolved a specific hunting mechanism recently
nature.com/news/baseball-players-reveal-how-humans-evolved-to-throw-so-well-1.13281
phys.org/news/2013-06-chimps-humans-baseball-pitcher.html
youtube.com/watch?v=1y__4xX8xp8

youtube.com/watch?v=yRELldIuZyM
sciencemag.org/news/2014/04/did-europeans-get-fat-neandertals

These things explain and silence, and even give legitimacy to some people, and some specific people and races, and also make them ineligible to be compared to others. It would be foolish, mostly for example to use the japs against the backdrop of the whites. Since even if they have a lot of Neanderthal DNA, their food preferences and lifestyle choices in the past 50k years made them different still.

Even the common negro who hunted, maybe even special region or isolated tribes could have, with more time, developed more tolerance for cholesterol.

No idea how any of this is related but ok. I guess you like posting that.

wat, did you sleep at biology class when evolution came up? If a person did a thing for a longass time in his history, his genes will change to adapt to that.

We did that thing, that thing was called hunting. And to become better at it, but also reap its fleshy benefits, we managed to also get genes that process fats better.

In diets there is most likely no such thing as a universalist approach. Just like there is no such thing in economics, politics, culture, rule of law, not in many things. We dont want mudslimes, and we should also not get generic advice for "everyone" (that everyone does not exist)

Is what the health posting the new monster/sips posting?

｢(ﾟﾍﾟ)ᵘʰʰʰʰʰ.. He just showed you scientific evidence that humans evolved to consume meat and there was tremendous evolutionary pressure to do so

Women are more likely to be vegan. Women generally live longer than men, but not because of being vegan

Not that hard to understand you pussy faggot

Well that maybe was the case millions of years ago when food was scarse, there was no preservation, people didn't live longer than 40 and most "modern" diseases didn't really exist.

That's the basic flaw of the paleo folks, their approach is just stupid from a modern, sedentary/abundance perspective. The modern science heavily points to a diet centered around plants, not vegan though.

are you tarded? When was the last mini ice age? What do you think we ate here in europe? Why do we have such a great upper body for throwing things?

Being hunters, in the hunter gatherer equation is a recent, but also somewhat long enough adaptation.

What surprises me most about you vegan fags is how much knowledge you lack of the world in general. Things that we take for granted. My pastebin is bordering on such extremely basic stuff, that its nearly laughable.

This, anthropology cannot be used to determine optimal diets.

Most of the dieases caused by meat come later in life.

all you need is lots of plants + limited amount of red meat and lots of fish.

Wat I just said I'm not even a vegan. Your reading comprehension is so bad I'll stop giving any further (You)s. Consider going to high school once again.

>my pastebin
AHHHH it's you. Ahahah nevermind, I know you're literally retarded.

Stop misusing anthropology. It not a hard science and diets shouldnt be made around them.

>(((netflix)))

lmao

most studies do not even take race into account you know. Rarely even look into it. As there is an adaptation to milk drinking, as there is to seaweed digestion, so most likely too there may be other traits to other races. The time span for the adaptations was sufficient and near the 50k range. We also have this exploding spleen that tells us that perhaps our digestion track also followed the same idea as our upper body, and our proven, hunter lifestyles.

Does this mean that it could be a diet that is optimal for us, even beyond 40? Yes it could be, all the other variables, like the harshness of the nature, the cold, the hunger, the stress are not present now. All that matters is if our body can process it, and apparently it could be.

Because retards keep posting about it to bait veganism arguments and it's fucking annoying.

In many of these articles there are also listed individuals that fair much better or worse at processing dietary fats. Gee I wonder why. What this mysterious factor is. And my approach is closer to reality and to an optimal diet than yours. If other parts of us show use for a certain lifestyle, like that of hunting, then there is no reason not to believe that our inside also havent changed.

Most likely this means that other races should stay away from meat, but for whites in general it should be more okay. Though perhaps with certain factors added. Like the removal of simple carbs.

>other races should stay away from meat, but for whites in general it should be more okay
Retarded. Also you realise most modern studies in Europe and the US have mostly white subjects. You're basically saying all modern nutritional science is wrong cause "muh different evolution". Go back to naturalscience.org or whatever that site was.

>making studies about amerifat diets

>mostly white subjects
>usually not directly mentioned in the research things
>I wonder which (((ethical research committee))) could be behind it

And all I am saying is that if we developed an upper body for hunting, moved all that flesh through 50k years of evolution, it would make sense that a bunch of intestines wouldnt be too hard to change too. As the Neanderthal, 3x fat processing genes clearly show so.

And you do not represent the whole of modern science, there are many dead ends, and unknowns mentioned in these pieces. This racial ghost of adaptation could may as well be hiding in them.

>america
>different "whites"
>lots of shitskins

lol

maybe it could even be a different explanation for pic related still.

There is nothing wrong with coconut oil

I bet you take cold showers as well.

>Vegan supplements are availible for all those

Pretty healthy if you have to supplement fucking basic and essential stuff every human body needs

Obesity has skyrocketed in most european countries too though, even those with a low percentage of blacks/lations/asians (though asians are basically always lower anyway). Not saying it's not a factor, just that we don't know yet because science is so incredibly behind nutrition-wise. There's a lot to do before focusing on certain genetic differences.

>this is a shill thread
>/pol/ is posting in it
>vegans are pussy faggots
>meat in small amounts is fine (not steak every night)
>animal flesh is not very good for you
>dairy is fine unless negro or chinaman
>yoghurt, skyr, kefir, filmjolk, and all other fermented dairy is top tier
>fermented foodds in general are top tier
>lactose is not very good for you
>milkfat is not very good for you
>saturated fat is not very good for you
>cholesterol is not very good for you
all things in moderation, your movie fucking sucks, vegans are retards, meat and dairy are gains goblins

and you think you should kill a giant industry, economy and a thing that we did for so long, based on your feelings and a hunch that eating plants is really nice? Lol

Why dont you remove the jews from power, and get a proper racial research going on on food, include a group of eskimos as well, and a bunch of races that mostly eat animals.

Come back then and maybe you could formulate an actual coherent argument as a veganist.

Wat. I literally said nothing that would suggest any of that.

it's already known that esquimeaux are unhealthy because whale blubber is a terrible diet. then something about jews, then the word "veganist."

wtf is this autistic nonsense? you can't eat a political ideology. who cares.

>it's already known that esquimeaux are unhealthy because whale blubber is a terrible diet
>quotation needed
>what is their blood pressure, their LDL etc.?

>Don't want to get heart disease and cancer.
You won't
>What about all the studies showing that vegans have less heart disease , less cancer , less vitamin deficiencies over all , less obesity and longer lives than flesh eaters??
They're bullshit
>diagnosisdiet.com/meat-and-cancer/
>chriskresser.com/red-meat-cancer-again-will-it-ever-stop/
>mensfitness.com/nutrition/what-to-eat/meat-cancer-bacon-who-report-mens-fitness-health
>rawfoodsos.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/minger_formal_response2.pdf
>deniseminger.com/2010/08/06/final-china-study-response-html/
>deniseminger.com/2010/08/03/the-china-study-a-formal-analysis-and-response/
>deniseminger.com/2010/07/07/the-china-study-fact-or-fallac/ >foodrenegade.com/the-china-study-discredited/
>deniseminger.com/the-china-study/
>westonaprice.org/our-blogs/the-curious-case-of-campbells-rats-does-protein-deficiency-prevent-cancer/
>westonaprice.org/our-blogs/taking-a-trip-down-memory-lane-fishing-for-our-good-friend-glutathione-in-the-waters-of-the-memory-hole-how-t-colin-campbell-helped-prove-that-protein-protects-us
>reddit.com/r/keto/comments/2qxnro/red_meat_triggers_toxic_immune_reaction_which/cnai2od/
>caloriesproper.com/red-meat-wont-kill-you-it-will-make-you-stronger/
>saragottfriedmd.com/does-meat-cause-cancer-revisiting-the-meat-igf-1-and-cancer-connection/
>(cont.)

>(cont.)
>meat in small amounts is fine (not steak every night)
>chaosandpain.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-simplicity-of-dieting-it-really-is.html?m=1
>animal flesh is not very good for you
>saturated fat is not very good for you
>cholesterol is not very good for you
>press.endocrine.org/doi/full/10.1210/jcem.85.1.6291
>authoritynutrition.com/it-aint-the-fat-people/
>authoritynutrition.com/top-8-reasons-not-to-fear-saturated-fats/
>chriskresser.com/the-diet-heart-myth-cholesterol-and-saturated-fat-are-not-the-enemy/
>breakingmuscle.com/healthy-eating/why-all-humans-need-to-eat-meat-for-health
>regular milk is even higher in phyloestrogenqs so you should just give up dairy
>lactose is not very good for you
>milkfat is not very good for you
>suppversity.blogspot.com/2014/01/true-or-false-dairy-is-toxic-hormone.html
Also highly doubt the"milk=prostate cancer" entirely especially when in the article it says:
>Estrone and prostate cancer risk in men: As far as the estrone levels Maruyama et al. measured in their 2010 study are concerned it is very difficult to tell, whether or not the 26% increase in E2 levels is or isn't a problem.
>The estrone values in the Maruyama study are unrealistic. With a normal range of difficult to tell
>unrealistic
and
>What remains to be seen, though, is whether future epidemiological evidence will support or refute the currently heralded hypothesis that dairy consumption increases prostate cancer risk and whether we will be able to identify more feasible explanations for this relations than those that are implicated by the results Maruyama et al. present in their 2010 study.
>sciencedrivennutrition.com/hormones-milk/
>(cont.)

>(cont.)
>it's already known that esquimeaux are unhealthy because whale blubber is a terrible diet.
>diagnosisdiet.com/all-meat-diets/