Author Topic: The Great Health Debate  (Read 24833 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KD

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,930
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #25 on: February 08, 2011, 08:45:04 am »
Says surprise guests, but I am guessing not. They added Mark Sisson vs. Fred Pateneude last minute tho.

Tonight is Sally Fallon and T. Colin Campbell. no matter what one thinks of SF or WAPF..this should be huge (for vegans anyway) and should provide some interesting discussion on traditional peoples at least I imagine.


edit

they swtiched it to Dr. Jonny Bowden and Dr. Joel Fuhrman. Bowden seems interesting - likes pemmican, and Furhman is another one of these vegans that actually is somewhat reasonable. Probably will irritate the raw crowd all around.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2011, 09:15:09 am by KD »

Offline CHK91

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #26 on: February 08, 2011, 09:05:26 am »
Dang, they switched the schedule. I haven't heard of these two people, but I'm curious about what they have to say.
All I want is the truth... Just gimme some truth.
"I wanna be the minority."

Offline laterade

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 857
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #27 on: February 08, 2011, 09:10:03 am »
Vonderplanitz does not seem to be the debate type. He seems more like the listen or I will bite your head off type.

Offline CHK91

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #28 on: February 08, 2011, 09:18:57 am »
Johnny Bowden knows his stuff.

I like how he points out how meat eater vs non meat eater data doesn't differentiate between meat eaters who eat pastured meat vs processed/junk food meat. People need to understand this. I doubt the other side would acknowledge this.
All I want is the truth... Just gimme some truth.
"I wanna be the minority."

Offline Caveman

  • Bear Hunter
  • ****
  • Posts: 179
  • Gender: Male
  • Man of the cave
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #29 on: February 08, 2011, 09:51:05 am »
I'm hearing some very good points from this guy, even though it's nothing new to me. I'm glad these points about "cleansing" diets are being put out there and how they are not diets to live and thrive off of.

Offline KD

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,930
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #30 on: February 08, 2011, 10:49:19 am »
oh man this is awful.

Offline CHK91

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #31 on: February 08, 2011, 10:52:41 am »
oh man this is awful.
Lol, he's currently saying almost everything we disagree with.
All I want is the truth... Just gimme some truth.
"I wanna be the minority."

Offline King Salmon

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating the best realistic diet
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #32 on: February 08, 2011, 11:07:38 am »
I'm hearing some very good points from this guy, even though it's nothing new to me. I'm glad these points about "cleansing" diets are being put out there and how they are not diets to live and thrive off of.

Yeah,Vitalis talks about that a lot though which is good.
"Eat the best of what's available and call it a day"

Offline kurite

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,270
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #33 on: February 08, 2011, 11:13:53 am »
Vonderplanitz does not seem to be the debate type. He seems more like the listen or I will bite your head off type.
And then let it age for a while so he can eat it.
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."

Offline achillezzz

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #34 on: February 08, 2011, 08:39:25 pm »
Vonderplanitz does not seem to be the debate type. He seems more like the listen or I will bite your head off type.

ROFL

Offline raw-al

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,961
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #35 on: February 09, 2011, 08:40:59 am »
Cousins just said(reluctantly) he cares more about spirituality than health. LOL
He is pulling the longer life span BS.
I struggled with this for awhile (spirituality VS meat) however the meat camp is winning because there is no consistence in whether it's true. The Dalai LLama had to return to eating meat on the advice of his medical people. A vegan friend had to go on iron supplements etc due to life threatening problems.

One source that I trust said that to get to the highest levels you need to be vegan, but that level is not something that most people are ready for.

In the meantime a Chinese doc that I went to out of curiosity told me that liver issues are common with vegans. Because of Vit B and iron.
Earlier he also said that your baby is going to have lower SAT scores if your wife eats fish once a month while pregnant.
hmmmm did he mention the source of that info?
Cheers
Al

Offline laterade

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 857
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #36 on: February 09, 2011, 09:12:47 am »
hmmmm did he mention the source of that info?
No. He does not have to, he is a vegan. heh
He admitted to taking protein supplements, he defeated himself.

Offline laterade

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 857
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #37 on: February 09, 2011, 09:14:27 am »
One source that I trust said that to get to the highest levels you need to be vegan, but that level is not something that most people are ready for.

Highest levels of what?

Offline raw-al

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,961
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #38 on: February 09, 2011, 09:39:08 am »
Highest levels of what?
Consciousness.
Cheers
Al

Offline laterade

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 857
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #39 on: February 09, 2011, 09:55:30 am »
Consciousness.

I suspected so... guess I am not ready  >D

Offline laterade

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 857
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #40 on: February 09, 2011, 10:02:51 am »
Donna Gates and Rob Young
Anyone interested?

Offline CHK91

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #41 on: February 09, 2011, 10:56:11 am »
Huh?

Eating more alkaline food to produce more stomach acid?



Is there any truth to this at ALL?
All I want is the truth... Just gimme some truth.
"I wanna be the minority."

Offline KD

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,930
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #42 on: February 09, 2011, 11:22:19 am »
"fruitarian blood looks like rotten bananas"

hehe

"fructose is a neurotoxin"

ok

"the fact that we age is the evidence that we can not over alkalize."

????

I have to admit, I have always found this guy fascinating with his electron powered humans and so forth. he's sort of like a demented dr. Seuss.

"do you want to kill you children?"

"no sane scientific reason for eating animal protein"


Obviously people do not 'NEED' animal 'protein' for athletic pursuits. Health/regeneration is debatable but fairly likely and this is visible without need to employ the micro, even though much of this stuff is interesting. Take away sugars from the things of the earth that have actually ever existed as food as a source of calories.and pretty much what you have is animal 'protein' and fat...as well as a very narrow spectrum of edible non rancid seasonal plant fats and non sugar fruits with a few wild herbs and very little ocean plants or usable grasses or superfoods and salts. Never-mind even some sugars as well as diets rich in animal foods being free virtually all the diseases being spoken about prior to agriculture and also even largely in indigenous cultures...not saying that salts or ocean plants are bad....

It was interesting to finally see that he does not necessarily recommend a 300 calorie a day diet rich in electrons or whatever from being both low carb, no 'sugar' and no animal fat or protein. apparently the ideal diet of humans and even strength trainers all over the globe is a variety of green foods plenty of avocodo and virtually nothing else that was ever eaten as those things clearly cause people to be mortal. He did say athletes would still eat upwards of 4000 calories a day, largely coming from the avocado.





Is there any truth to this at ALL?

basically everyone is 100% correct.

Offline laterade

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 857
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #43 on: February 09, 2011, 11:52:14 am »
While hiking, I met a man operating a goat/llama farm in the mountains.
He told me that he had no acidity in his body.
This was due to goat milk kefir and all of the oxygen from the trees surrounding his house.
 l)

Personally I think people buy it due to the common emotional response to the word "acid", just like with "fat".
Propaganda requires no proof when dealing with non critical thinkers.

Offline CHK91

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #44 on: February 09, 2011, 01:37:01 pm »
I'm surprised by a couple of things:

1. Robert Young is still alive

2. He hasn't killed or seriously harmed anyone with his recommendations.

5 grams of protein? REALLY?
All I want is the truth... Just gimme some truth.
"I wanna be the minority."

Offline laterade

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 857
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #45 on: February 10, 2011, 04:48:02 am »
Listening to Young now...
I don't agree with any of this at all.
Would have been awesome to see Vonderplanitz debate him, they are polar opposite.

Offline CHK91

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #46 on: February 10, 2011, 09:52:31 am »
OH LOL, David Wolfe is a creationist? XD

I doubt he would understand human's natural diet, if this is the case.

"Cook raw meat to dramatically lower karma so you don't get blasted with the karma from the animal."

WTF? I don't understand some of these diet gurus with their new age spirituality BS.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2011, 10:35:52 am by CHK91 »
All I want is the truth... Just gimme some truth.
"I wanna be the minority."

Offline KD

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,930
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #47 on: February 10, 2011, 01:44:35 pm »
DW

notice how virtually all of his criticisms (which were actually quite few in comparison to some other folks) about animal eating revolved around karma and spiritual concerns with some 'environmental' stuff. Often he labeled animal foods as 'superfoods' which were almost 'too concentrated' and 'too sustaining'. he basically (indirectly) praised marrow calling it an alkaline fat. To me much of what he said as usual was totally interesting and his critiques and acknowledgments (like Cousens) in many ways seem the most possible as having some validity to heavy contemporary meat consumption..particularly in comparison to the utterly simplistic criticisms and pointing at very limited isolated situations and factors of other people in 'health' communities.. In this more plausible regard, he mentions things like bone marrow containing more modern toxins or eating meat that we don't hunt or participate in having some effect on our spiritual well being, as well as of course parasites and such things if eating raw. He did say all the raw meat people he knew way back were 'always sick'. He didn't say they were his housemates though.

To me some of these criticisms are certainly within the range of possibility. They don't make me want to construct some completely artificial way of life, but i'm open to hearing their opinions and suggestions for something that perhaps could be more ideal than blind re-enactment. Many of the other things he suggested regarding longevity and/or cleansing I also see as possibilities albeit possibly unessential for some or some approaches.

Most importantly Wolfe basically praised massive amounts of products that either directly or indirectly came from animals...as long as they didn't come from killing animals directly...which in a way is odd  as obviously many involved enslaving animals, creating problems for ecosystems or creating totally artificial processing plants or farms that destroy wild habitats as Daniel then spoke about.

DV

Daniel was basically a perfect counterpoint to probably even the other 'meat eaters' in the talks as expected in discussing how 'unknown' so many diets (including raw foodism of any kind) in fact are. I loved how he talked about how disingenuous it was for 'health leaders' to basically spring spiritual or unrealistic trips as having known health consequences, when they should really be saying 'hey, would you like to come on an experiment with me? i'm trying something out that has never been done before"

hehe

unfortunately not too much or nothing about raw meat eating, and he actually discussed how homo erectus (pre sapien of course) being the one to master fire and apply it to food.

lots of the other breakdowns were great and well articulated in such eyeopening fashion probably for people that have never actually thought about traditional eating or outside boxes filled with raw-vegan dogmas... but probably not much for most folks here.

I enjoyed both these talks. DW might be a bit blubbery as he suggests which in a way is fairly impressive if he actually eats how he says he eats (which is not likely and contrary to most reports) and even just in general as a raw vegetarian...but I think he does have alot to offer...particularly like Fuhrman..at least for constructing higher quality vegetarian diets.


OH LOL, David Wolfe is a creationist? XD


From what i've heard in the past, Wolfe isn't a creationist, although he did reference creationist book. As far as I know he was a proponent of Huge de Vries mutation theory..which does not suggest the world is at all recent, but that there are just massive gaps in the fossil record, that do suggest some species do not 'evolve' over time but change massively in a relatively short periods. I resonate with that more myself.

Offline laterade

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 857
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #48 on: February 10, 2011, 04:46:41 pm »
Vegan argument... signs of life, none.

DV referred to driver's licenses as being the same as cow ear tags. YES  ;D
Living in Az, I totally agree with this.
If you do not have an ID you can be kidnapped or killed by the blue man group if encountered.

Overpopulation... that might just deserve it's own thread,
What do you think?
« Last Edit: February 10, 2011, 05:09:49 pm by actup90 »

Offline CHK91

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: The Great Health Debate
« Reply #49 on: February 10, 2011, 11:57:09 pm »

which does not suggest the world is at all recent, but that there are just massive gaps in the fossil record, that do suggest some species do not 'evolve' over time but change massively in a relatively short periods. I resonate with that more myself.


This is still part of evolution. It's called punctuated equilibrium as opposed to gradualism. High environmental stress causes accelerated natural selection. If he believes evolution is false, then he could not possibly have this point of view.
All I want is the truth... Just gimme some truth.
"I wanna be the minority."

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk