Does anyone have some rebuttals to this book advocating a whole plant-based diet (vegan) as the healthiest way to live

well what exactly is he advocating for? the broccoli foundation? selling t-shirts?

you're advocating that he's gone through the hassle of researching the hell out of some book just to skim donation money from a vegan promoting website

whereas it would be far easier to just not say he's donating it in the first place and pocket the income

>smoking a cigar full of pot is ridiculous

Found the white guy who can't handle a blunt

He's claiming that Esselstyn and the McDougall Gang have it correct where you can prevent heart disease, diabetes and other major causes of death through plant based low fat diet.

Mediterranean diet isn't vegan

Him and the rest of these guys in this "movement" aren't greenpeace heroes. They have ego problems and monetary greed just like anybody else. They are all in bed together just like the lowcarb crowd is with taubes and cordain.

Yeah true but it's very obvious that plants are the way to go if you're concerned about health. The animal product fearmongering is probably stupid but certainly way better than the keto/lowcarb group outlawing fruits and whole grains.

I have a rebuttal.

I'd rather have an (allegedly) shorter life that I (and people around me) enjoy, than live a slightly longer life of being an insufferable vegan, who insists on dragging everyone into their miserable way of life with them.

It's basically a reactionary position to...well, this board. Fuck bread, fuck pasta, fuck pitas, fuck wraps...fuck things that are fillers--that have minimal nutritional value--but are worshiped like Jesus in Alabama. The hymn of the old is "gimme dem breads with dem meats on top"...okay so you want to eat yourself to death...that's fine...but...don't say we didn't warn you. Spinach? Eeh...Only if it's deep fried with bacon and chicken grease....

Okay so now your heart, lungs, and stomach...
Y-yeah but...pass the garlic butter and bread....
And the pasta...and we need some pie and cakes...

Gluttony might perhaps, potentially be the root cause...
youtube.com/watch?v=lhbHTjMLN5c

>does anyone have some rebuttals

Why yes, I do. It's called reality.

This guy survived an avalanche and still made it to the top of Everest.

You don't live in reality. You live in your little cherry picked delusion bubble.

>one guy

Nice cherry picked delusion bubble you live in there, does it come for free with your vegan farts or does is there an iApp for that?

Lots of people die on Everest. That's a statistically worthless anecdote. We need, over several seasons, a dozen more dead vegans or a thousand more dead carnists before any trend can be found.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_who_died_climbing_Mount_Everest

>We need, over several seasons, a dozen more dead vegans

What the world really needs is a steady stream of dead vegans

this guy managed to get to both the north and south pole in one year
so I guess this proves that people without a leg are exactly as capable as most people, right??

Small amounts of cigarettes won't kill you
Problem is people get addicted and start smoking way too fucking much

Yes they might, they literally cause cancer and every single ciarette is bad for you. "Everything in moderation" is a shitty motto.

>Yes they might,

Sure, but the chance is so small we might as well ignore it.

You might as well say that you should never touch an electrical appliance or light switch because you "might get electrocuted". Or that you should never go outdoors because you might be the victim of a stray meteorite.

No no no you're confusing everything now.

The difference is that one thing is inherently bad and you do it by choice while the others are just everyday, neutral aspects of life.

Veganism is a communist plot to weaken the West.

There's no difference at all. Everything we do in life is a balance of a risk and a benefit. Literally everything.

Operating electronic devices most certainly is a risk. People get shocked all the time. sometimes they die. Sometimes people's cell phone batteries explode and burn their owners. And so on.

The difference is that each person has a different perception of what risk they consider acceptable or not. And often times it's bass-ackwards. A person might bitch about the health risks of eating undercooked meat, yet would gladly go ride a motorcycle, despite the latter being far more dangerous. People have a shitty ability to measure risk, and almost certainly are inconsistent in choosing which risks they take or not.

You can have good genes, eat cigarette butts and steak every day and live to 120, or you can have shit genes and croak at 50, never having enjoyed a single good meal in life.

My dad was telling me not to go to Spain because of turrists, while stuffing his face with smoked meat full of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and heterocyclic amines. lol.

very true, but this is all a matter of reducing risk as much as possible

trying to gamble with an 80% chance to win rather than a 50% chance

there can obviously be vegans who are completely nutritionally deficient or eat vegan shit food who would have been better off eating a normal american diet

there is a list of the "daily dozen" listed in this book that seem to cover almost every angle - except long chain omega 3's, which i disagree with (recommended algae supplementation). i would rather just eat sardines as they're low in contaminants and essentially a superfood

and i do agree that vegans are generally smug as shit and deserve a kick in the nuts

but i personally will eat meat every once and a while and not bring everyone else down with me when doing so - i don't care about eating meat so much as exotic foods don't impress me much - i just want to eat whatever gives me the best chance at a healthy life

>50% chance

That's not gambling. It's guaranteed to neither win nor lose.

There's really no consensus. Studies show a correlation but not really a causation

Not him, but I live in a pretty white area and blunts are practically all the white stoners smoke around here. Second place goes to bowls and third goes to joints.

>44 years old
he doesn't look very healthy.

>muh genetics

Was debunked ages ago. Genetics play a very, very little role in your ability to live longer or not.

he looks fine for a guy in his 40s.

he looks like a skeleton

kek
looks like he's using all his strength keeping that fork up

He really doesn't.

just propaganda by big natural food
Remember, Whole Foods is a bigger, more powerful company than Monsanto

>he looks fine for a guy in his 40s.
if he was an inmate in auschwitz-birkenau then yes, he looks fine for an inmate in his 40s

probably just his shit jew genetics

good at intelligence but terrible at body physique

but literally everything mentioned in the book is available at your local walmart / grocery store

you could make the same argument that doctors who advocate running/exercise are just in the pockets of sporting goods stores

I think a big difference is literally every doctor will advocate excercise

Who dat?