Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Best diet, food, or nutrition for power

Quick update here:

Thank you Stef for putting on my map the 4h fasting.

I'm still sticking to it and loving it, doesn't even feel like fasting now.

Sometimes I do the 4h thing, and some other days I just do one meal.
A long meal, mind you, but that's also the pleasure of it :).

It's especially convenient when you're cooking yourself, since you only cook once, and clean after yourself only once.

A big game-changer.

Stef has reacted to this post.
Stef
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

@lucio

Yeah minimalism (especially in food) is a life changer and a big time/energy/money saver...

if you want to experiment something cool, try doing 3 days of no plants no dairy (you will notice no farts at all, really good for boosting sex confidence: thats the diet of the king of the jungle)

another nice blog for you:

https://www.kevinstock.io/health/health-dangers-of-a-plant-based-diet/

From an evolutionary point of view I realize the other day that animals win nothing by being "tasty" and still most of us find animal flesh/organs/bones and marrow tasty or very tasty, plants only the fruit wins a lot by being tasty so animals eat more of it (get sugar-addicted/almost all abuse drugs come from some plant) and disperse the seeds with the benefit of storing fat for winter, yet winter never comes in the "little-food-available-sense" for modern humans so most people only get fatter/bad skin/hormonal imabalances/hair loss/premature aging/other metabolic disease year after year.

For animals tasting bad would even be a benefit (punishing he who eats its flesh), so the fact that flesh does not taste horrible to most people is prove, in my mind, that we are probably very adapted to eat it as all the animal nutrients plus all important plant nutrients are supposed to be there somewhere in the animal cause nutrients dont get destroyed after eating them that would defy the purposse of eating them in the first place and many are stored or circulating to the place they are needed via the blood.

Herbivores have to do almost magic: transform low quality hard to digest full of anti nutrients plant tissue into animal tissue, this process as it is surviving the plant toxins is time/energy/nutrient consuming, so a 100% carnivore probably need even less nutrients as he is already "outsourcing" that process to prey animals ( a very extreme value taking proud carnivore zero zum game in nature)

give grapes to a dog or cat, or chocolate and they may die

humans are a little bit more plant tolerant, lol

Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.
Lucio Buffalmano

That's the next level, Stef.

I'll need some time at this current stage before feeling ready to attack the next one :D.

 

Stef has reacted to this post.
Stef
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Stef,

I believe there are other factors at play when it comes to the evolution of human beings. I personally believe the versatility of the human diet is what kept us evolving and thriving in every environment we've been exposed to (deserts, rainforests, prairies, tundra, you name it), and therefore there is just not this "best diet" for power. As long as you are consuming enough nutrients and calories, it really doesn't matter wether it comes from animals or plant sources or a mix between the two, or even particular animals and/or plant sources. There's just not enough research to claim one thing or another.

I myself am a vegan, been vegan for 2 years, have gained the most muscle mass as a vegan (not necessarily because I'm a vegan, but because I've been eating right AND following a smart strength training regimen), and as an martial artist I am still on top of my game even after becoming a vegan (and before this been thriving on a vegetarian diet for 10 years), defended my master's thesis as a vegan. All that in comparison to meat eaters. Money/time/effort isn't even an issue, since veganism is cheaper (as long as you are not eating ultraprocessed garbage, as you shouldn't be anyway) and it's not really more time/effort intensive in comparison to meat eating.

I'm a vegan not because I believe eating vegan is the "best" way to feed, but mainly for three reasons:

  1. In an industrial society there is no single way to mass produce meat/dairy/eggs in a way that is cruelty free
  2. In an industrial society (but not in agrarian or hunter-gatherer societies) we do have other options that are less impactful on the environment and wellbeing of animals and are equally nutrititous
  3. I care about the environment and the wellbeing of the animals

Now, I'm not here to promote veganism or anything. I myself wouldn't even care about being vegan if we didn't live in an industrial society. But there is just this myth that "herbivores have to do almost magic" and that's simply not true. There's just not enough evidence for that. If I were to lay down some guidelines for "eating for power", that would be:

  1. Eat enough calories. Trying to gain weight? Just eat more of it. Trying to lose? Eat less.
  2. Own your macro and- micronutrients. If you have any deficiencies or imbalances, just eat enough foods that have that particular nutrient or supplement it
  3. Eat what you feel is more tasty/ethical/easy/practical for your own reasons

As long as you are within these general guidelines, you are doing fine. Maybe eating animals was the only way our ancestors had to meet them, but it doesn't mean it's the only way or even today the best way. Instead, think of it as another way.

I'll link you to an interesting article by Barbell Medicine discussing the health benefits of red meat. They themselves do not promote veganism or vegetarianism and do believe eating red meat may be beneficial and, from a purely health perspective, eating more or less of it isn't something people should stress about. But not magically beneficial, as they themselves admit that "vegetarian and vegan approaches can be utilized based on individual preferences"

https://www.barbellmedicine.com/blog/the-science-of-red-meat-and-health/

Hope we can further this discussion

Cheers

P.S: the same thing applies to meal frequency. You can eat 1x, 2x, 3x, 4x, one million x a day. Until there's enough research to prove otherwise, it all boils down to individual preferences. Elite athletes (who I believe to be a good parameter to have in mind when we think of what's best for human organisms functioning) report a lot of variance in terms of frequency, so I believe it's all fair game. Assuming you are a healthy individual, your body is just too good at handling anything you throw at it, as long as you throw enough for what you demand of it ūüėÄ

 

 

Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.
Lucio Buffalmano

From @bucktickrammstein18:

When i used to have a regular diet i get sick lick 3 or 4 times per year, now that I change my diet (I became a nose to tail carnivore) I have not been sick, not a single cold (or at least no symptoms), like in 10 years, call it a miracle if you want, but I have my theories about it.

Very interesting.

Of course, to be accurate one should have run a few independent lives:

  1. one where you kept your previous diet
  2. one where you changed to a "healthy" diet, but including fruits and vegetables
  3. one where you went for your current diet

Still, if the change has been that abrupt, then I think that it's fair to consider that the diet probably has had at least something to do with it -and possibly a good chunk of it-.

If someone here is interested in starting a thread about a lot of probably unsound treatments for many ailments let me now! (and what I believe about health optimization, etc.)

I'd be interested.

From evolutionary psychology texts, I've learned for example that the body adjusts and reacts better than most people would give it credit for.
I think Buss wrote that aspirin to lower the temperature might not do anything since you're treating the symptom. And it might be counterproductive, since there is a good reason why the body raises the temperature.

Stef has reacted to this post.
Stef
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/israeli-study-humans-were-hyper-carnivorous-apex-predators-for-2-million-years/

If this is true, and I believe it is

I find hard to make my peace with this statement

As long as you are consuming enough nutrients and calories, it really doesn't matter wether it comes from animals or plant sources or a mix between the two, or even particular animals and/or plant sources.

Imagine saying that to any other "apex predator", why humans would be the exception?

But there is just this myth that "herbivores have to do almost magic" and that's simply not true.

its not a myth, it is a completely wrong way of describing it that I used on purpose for dramatic effect.

How a cow, for example, creates cow tissue eating grass, is a process relatively understood scientifically.

But how many hours does a cow eats per day? like 6 or more, we humans can not even eat many of the part plants a lot of herbivores do, most of us would not want to eat stools like the gorilla do to get B 12. Our feeding habits seems to be way closer to a carnivore ( most people do not want to spend half a day just eating like a chimp), ok thanks to agriculture and plant proccesing we would not need to do that, yet then that means that for humans to be vegans we need relatively advanced technology? then how it is a vegan diet supposed to be natural, and if it is not natural how it would be healthy? (in this case the naturalistic fallacy may not apply, since by definition, a healthy diet for a species tend to be the one that they are "naturally" or evolutionary adapted).

The tendency I see repeated a lot is that when humans have acces to megafauna they hunt and eat a lot of animal tissue and fat, some of this hunters only eat plants when they have no option (starvation)... Or because they find it tasty.

To be fair as long as you are healthy and eat enough animal tissue, the body seems to be able to handle plant toxins and anti-nutrients kind of well even long term.

To be even more fair, there may be some people that for some reasson do better eating less animal tissue (  yet in my opinion most people would do better eating more nor less) but we are talking about eating an animal who lived a natural life and was feeded a natural diet, i can not put my hand in the fire for super-market meat or as you call it "industrial  society meat".

Cruelty is part of the process, you can minimize it, yet i dont thinks there is such a thing as "cruelty" free meat, unless you grow it in a lab or something... ( or you scavenge and only eat death corpses)

Assuming you are a healthy individual, your body is just too good at handling anything you throw at it, as long as you throw enough for what you demand of it ?

I dont know, you are talking about meal frequency here, yet this statement sound to optimistic, for sure the human body can handle a lot, if not very little people would past age 20, yet i dont think we should just "throw" things at it carelessly.

It would just bee to weird for an "herbivore" to have become an apex predator, given humans are mega predators, I can not even start to fathom how we would still be "healthier" eating more plant parts? maybe plants are healthier than "industrial" meat, that may be the key to the puzzle, I would be surprised to know that plants are healthier than the meat of a wild animal.

Almost as if someone tell me that a Lion do better on a plant based diet...

 

I think Buss wrote that aspirin to lower the temperature might not do anything since you're treating the symptom. And it might be counterproductive, since there is a good reason why the body raises the temperature.

One may be the same reasson why we cook (or are recommended)  to cook our food (ironically), some invaders have trouble living or reproducing in higher temperatures, another would be to speed up the metabolism as to give more energy to the inmune system for a faster mobilization, and probably there are others...

Or the rationale (mechanistic process) behind may be something completely different (cause I am not the biggest fan of the., lets call it, UNRESTRICTED germ theory of disease) yet the thing is the same: the fever is helping the body.

And that pattern is key, treating the sympton ( usually the way the body is trying to heal) and doing nothing/making worse the Root Cause of the Disease.

also medication will create new symptoms (that your average doctor would try to mask with new medication, creating a deadly loop) so you are never far away from polypharmacy...

Existing Guidelines

  • 2015‚Äď2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend limiting red meat intake to about¬†1 serving¬†per week and that saturated fat make up <10% of total daily calorie intake.¬†¬†2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines
  • The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) recommends that individuals consume no more than¬†3 portions¬†per week of unprocessed red meat and little, if any, processed red meat.¬†WCRF 2018
  • The UK‚Äôs National Health Service (NHS) agrees with the WCRF and advises that people should limit consumption of all red meat to¬†490 grams¬†per week.NHS 2018
  • The American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology Guidelines recommend a saturated fat intake of 5-6% of total daily calorie intake.¬†Eckel 2013

Well the government needs to feed the slaves as little meat as possible to avert a political crisis (if all pepole went 90 to 100% carnivore and refused to eat rice and wheat and plants, that would be big political problem dont you think?), thats may take on this (that little amount of meat allowed may be to prevent people from going totally malnourished and to make the effects of a plant based diet slower to manifest, so when you get sick you don get it it was your diet and you blame old age or whatever), the same way people blame money devaluation on all kinds of stuff, when the real cause usually is the government printing a lot of paper money.

And the best way to do it, it is to convince you it is for your own good/health. (thats the method  my mother used to use to manipulate me to great succes)

Heart Disease

The connection between diet and ‚Äúheart disease‚ÄĚ is based upon two hypotheses; 1) the¬†diet-heart¬†hypothesis and, 2) the¬†lipid¬†hypothesis. The diet-heart hypothesis argues that reducing dietary saturated fat will reduce serum cholesterol levels, thus slowing the build up of fats, cholesterol, and other substances in blood vessel walls, e.g.¬†atherosclerosis.¬†Ramsden 2016¬†The lipid hypothesis takes this a step further and predicts that lowering serum cholesterol levels will reduce the incidence of heart disease, though this is actually a misnomer.¬†Brown 1990¬†Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease or ‚ÄúASCVD‚ÄĚ is the more specific disease category including things like coronary heart disease (CHD), myocardial infarction (i.e., heart attack), cerebrovascular disease / stroke, and peripheral arterial disease.¬†Grundy 2019¬†In this section, we‚Äôll be looking at the data for both of these hypotheses and see how this affects our red meat intake recommendations.

The elephant in the room is, that if you have been telling people for 50 years that eating a lot of red meat is bad and they believe it, the people who keep eating a lot of red meat would be the one that also do drugs and  have extremely unhealthy lifes-styles. Again counfounding variables.

the hearth is a piece of red meat, why would eating read meat damage the hearth? see the mouth, teeth ( almost bone) and the gums? what damage the mouth? as in cavities: carbohydrate ( plant derived) the bacteria produce acid and that corrodes the teeth...

what happens if the hearth is also forced to metabolize a lot of sugar? what if cardiac cells also produce acid from carb metabolism? acid in the hearth... i does not sounds good, actually there is a theory of hearth disease by a brazilian Doctor than goes like that.

Cows are vegan, and their read meat is full of saturated fat ( kind of ironic), all animals seems to preffer saturated fat to be the most abundant in their bodies as an energy storing device, excess body fat is bad, yet i dont see fat tigers in nature!

then again, a cow should it grass, if you feed it corn and then eat the fatty flesh and get hearth disease... thats another topic.

many researches conveniently forget to take into account the type of meat we are talking about, they have went so far as to use TRANS fat instead of natural saturated fat, and report the results as if pertaining to the later...

 

Processing...
Scroll to Top