Does anyone in here seriously eat healthy?

[Looney]

There are too many reasons to mention why here though, so I will only mention one, which happens to be my personal favorite. Dietary fat is a precursor for acetylcholine. Without this, you=stupid.

And dietary fat is the ONLY precursor for acetylcholine? NO it isn't. But then you'll say you can't get enough for nuts, soy, or milk. Well, the more you have of something doesn't necessary mean the great it will get. If you consumed 1000g of protein, that doesn't mean you'll get 5x the muscle mass in growth as somebody that is taking 200g of protein. Your body only uses so much, and all the rests goes to waste... and you can get perfectly enough precursors of acetylcholine that you won't degenerate.

If you think that a low protein diet is "healthy", you are seriously misinformed. Nutrition has been my life for years. My body has been a nutrition research lab. I've don the tests on myself, not gorillas. If my protein intake falls below 300g/day, I lose substantial lean body mass. If I can keep it over 400g/day, I can really gain quality LBM fast.

Nice body! But i've got to say, that just because you're doing it one way, doesn't mean it's the only way. I use to know of a bodybuilder that didn't eat meat too, and i was a vegetarian when i was peaking as well, and got all my diet through my veggie diet and protein supplements.

If you think people are going to become skin and bones, then you're mistaken. They'll lose a lot of their body fat, and maintain their muscles. TRUE, gaining muscle mass as a vegetarian is going to be slightly more difficult, but far from impossible. You already have to adhere to a different diet if you're bodybuilding, and if you're a vegetarian, it's just a little more work, but not impossible. The misconception that vegetarians are lethargic weaklings with nothing but skin and bones is so incorrect. Infact, vegetarians FEEL better and are typically more energetic than meat eaters.

 

[Fastball]

<< If you think people are going to become skin and bones, then you're mistaken. They'll lose a lot of their body fat, and maintain their muscles. TRUE, gaining muscle mass as a vegetarian is going to be slightly more difficult, but far from impossible. You already have to adhere to a different diet if you're bodybuilding, and if you're a vegetarian, it's just a little more work, but not impossible. The misconception that vegetarians are lethargic weaklings with nothing but skin and bones is so incorrect. Infact, vegetarians FEEL better and are typically more energetic than meat eaters. >>



Dude, you should really quit posting now. Each time you reply you stray further from reality. There are so many inaccuracies in that statement that I'm not even going to comment anymore. It's very obvious that you know nothing about nutrition. You are totally clueless to even the "basics".

 

[DuffmanOhYeah]

<< They are VERY different than we are. In fact, they are SO different that they constitute an entirely different species. Shocker huh? I don't know how to ask this nicely, so here goes: Please stop being ignorant.


I think you're the ignorant there buddy. Just because they're a different species doesn't mean their systems are different from ours. Infact, they're more common than dissimilar to us. Ever wonder why chimps are used in medical research? >>


Their systems (while ostensibly similar to ours) are in fact quite different. Why are chimps used in lab research? Because they are the closest we can get to human without actually being human. and don't give me this "they are more common than dissimilar to us" bullsh!t. Are you basing this on the percentage of shared DNA? Well great, do you know that we share upwards of 80% of the same DNA as a starfish? Wow, based on your reasoning, they are 80% similar to us. Hell, we must be practically brothers.
We split from any common lineage with gorillas nearly 6.7 million years ago. I can't believe that because they look vaguely similar to us that you think they must have similar characteristics. Go and do some reading on the matter.

 

[Ameesh]

<< vegetarians are jacked and hairy. >>



OMG!!! OH NO! AIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!! NOOOOOO!O!OO!O!!!!

 

[DuffmanOhYeah]

<< With regards to your cancer point, how the hell can meat cause cancer? Every carnivore on the planet eats meat and none of them get cancer. Cancer is because of smoking, increased radiation, chemicals in our food, less active lifestyle, etc.


Look up on The Oxford Vegetarian Study, and you'll see they did a pretty comprehensive study on it. Something like 6000 participants over 12 years (and still going), and non-meat eaters had lower lvls of mortality, cancer rates, BMI, and pretty much any other benefits you can think of.

As for needing fat for your body to absorb vitamins... well, i'm pretty sure vitamins are absorbed whether there is fat or not, because other creatures seem to do it just fine, including primates. But even if it's less efficient, i'm sure it's made up by the greater volume of vitamins you're consuming. >>


Wow, I didn't even read this one. Dude, just shut up now and save yourself the embarrasment. You really have no clue what you are talking about.

<< , i'm pretty sure vitamins are absorbed whether there is fat or not, because other creatures seem to do it just fine, including primates >>


Sheesh! Is there like a spurious logic flu going around or something?

 

[Entity]

<< If you think that a low protein diet is "healthy", you are seriously misinformed. >>



I seriously hope you were arguing with someone else. In the future, please quote, so we can tell who you are disagreeing with. To summarize (in case you missed my previous point): I merely stated (and truthfully, at that) that normal-protein diets are not difficult to sustain under a vegetarian lifestyle. That does not necessarily mean that people always get the protein they need; however, complete proteins are easily found in vegetarian diets.

I never even implied that a low-protein diet is "healthy." I merely countered your argument that "It is almost impossible to get an adequate intake of protein without meat in your diet."

Rob

 

[Entity]

<< Nutrition has been my life for years. My body has been a nutrition research lab. I've don the tests on myself, not gorillas. If my protein intake falls below 300g/day, I lose substantial lean body mass. If I can keep it over 400g/day, I can really gain quality LBM fast. >>



I'll see what studies I can find, however, I am sure that I can find ample sources that point to the fact that the amount of protein you are taking in is extremely excessive. General consensus places necessary protein intake at 1g per kg of body mass. 40-70g of protein is more than sufficient for most individuals. There are scientific studies to back this up, as well. One case (as in yours) does not make for a study, or even for any significant findings whatsoever, except in your specific case. One cannot infer general causation from one case.

Rob

 

[Entity]

http://www.pcrm.org/health/Info_on_Veg_Diets/protein.html

Recommended intake: Body weight (in lb) x .36 . . .

http://www.fhsu.edu/hhp/faculty/mcneil/mypage/aging/requirements/sld030.htm

Standard recommendation: .8g/kg

http://www.exrx.net/Nutrition/Protein.html

Your diet of protein could, in fact, if used over a long period of time, lead to kidney damage. I'm guessing that you won't be dieting like that your whole life.

It should be added, also, that during his Mr. Universe years, Arnold Schwarzenegger would go on vegan diets for 6 months at a time.

Rob

PS - I'm not trying to argue the case that low-protein diets are healthy. What I am trying to do are refute your blatantly wrong ideas that vegetarians cannot get sufficient protein intake, and that 300g-400g of protein daily is a good idea.

 

[Looney]

Dude, you should really quit posting now. Each time you reply you stray further from reality. There are so many inaccuracies in that statement that I'm not even going to comment anymore. It's very obvious that you know nothing about nutrition. You are totally clueless to even the "basics".


How am i clueless from the 'basics'? Here's your claim:



<< It is almost impossible to get an adequate intake of protein without meat in your diet. >>



And that's utter BS. You can get enough protein from a vegetarian diet. A vegetarian diet isn't just salads, it's eggs, legumes, milk, and soy products.

The only evidence or reasoning you've shown is an anecdotal story:



<< If you think that a low protein diet is "healthy", you are seriously misinformed. Nutrition has been my life for years. My body has been a nutrition research lab. I've don the tests on myself, not gorillas. If my protein intake falls below 300g/day, I lose substantial lean body mass. If I can keep it over 400g/day, I can really gain quality LBM fast. >>



I gave you the reference to one of the most major studies in nutritional diets... doing a simple search for that reference will show hundreds of sites citing from it. Your entire argument stems from that you can't get enough protein from a vegetarian diet, and that is simply just wrong. You can, because a vegetarian diet is not just salads.


Link

Their systems (while ostensibly similar to ours) are in fact quite different. Why are chimps used in lab research? Because they are the closest we can get to human without actually being human. and don't give me this "they are more common than dissimilar to us" bullsh!t. Are you basing this on the percentage of shared DNA? Well great, do you know that we share upwards of 80% of the same DNA as a starfish? Wow, based on your reasoning, they are 80% similar to us. Hell, we must be practically brothers.

20% is very different... but it could be very similar on what kind of studies you want to do. Primates are 98+% in similarities, including the digestive and anatomical system. But i wasn't refering to DNA differences, i was refering to anatomical and physiological differences, and primates and humans are extremely similar.


Wow, I didn't even read this one. Dude, just shut up now and save yourself the embarrasment. You really have no clue what you are talking about.

As if you do? The only point on acetycholine you made was to PM you for a chemical explanation... lets hear your chemical explanation and why is it only possible from a meat diet.

 

[Jfur]

Gee, I have been vegetarian for 17 years and have not atrophied nor have I weakened as a result of my diet. In fact, for years, I cycled for 2+ hours a day with no problems (and yes, I gained muscle). There are plenty of proteins in legumes. If you equate vegetariansm with cheesy burritos and pizza, then of course it would cause problems I see my doctor regularly and have an above average iron count, strong bones, and no nutritional deficits (accoriding to my latest annual screening).

 

[weezergirl]

I don't really see why some of you keep bashing moralpanic. Everybody seems to think they are an expert on the matter just because of their own experience. Let's bring in real sources here including LINKS from credible websites.

This is a link about the pros and cons of being a vegetarian: link

Basically, what i got from it was that you can eat healthy being a vegetarian or not. Big surprise! What exactly are we arguing about here again?????

 

[DuffmanOhYeah]

<< http://www.pcrm.org/health/Info_on_Veg_Diets/protein.html

Recommended intake: Body weight (in lb) x .36 . . .

http://www.fhsu.edu/hhp/faculty/mcneil/mypage/aging/requirements/sld030.htm

Standard recommendation: .8g/kg

http://www.exrx.net/Nutrition/Protein.html

Your diet of protein could, in fact, if used over a long period of time, lead to kidney damage. I'm guessing that you won't be dieting like that your whole life.

It should be added, also, that during his Mr. Universe years, Arnold Schwarzenegger would go on vegan diets for 6 months at a time.

Rob

PS - I'm not trying to argue the case that low-protein diets are healthy. What I am trying to do are refute your blatantly wrong ideas that vegetarians cannot get sufficient protein intake, and that 300g-400g of protein daily is a good idea. >>


I understand where the arguments have become diverged. Both Fastball and I come from a little uh "heavier duty" line in terms of nutrition intake. Certainly for the average person, the levels of protein intake that we may consume is excessive. However, the studies that you found are very much under what may be required for an active individual, let alone one who is trying to gain muscle mass.
And please dont use the Arnold argument. 2 reason's why.
1. I would need to see adequate documentation to support this, and
2. It is pretty irrelevant anyway. Dude did enough roids to kill a horse.
Additionally, the sources of protein that may be in a Vegans diet are notoriously crap. 1 gram of protein does not universally equal 1 gram of protein. The structures vary, and accordingly so does the bodies ability to use them. Its called a bioavailability factor. So in terms of use, 50 grams of egg protein is NOT the same as 50 grams of soy protein. You may have to take in a good deal more than you anticipate to compensate for this difference. Not saying it is impossible for a vegan to consume enough to survive, certanly it is something that is possible. You just have to evaluate the type of health you wish to have. On that, to each his own.

 

[weezergirl]

haha, i feel dumb. as soon as i finish posting a bunch of posts with links pop up

 

[Entity]

<< 2. It is pretty irrelevant anyway. Dude did enough roids to kill a horse. >>


Heh. Ok, I'll concede that one.



<< Additionally, the sources of protein that may be in a Vegans diet are notoriously crap. 1 gram of protein does not universally equal 1 gram of protein. The structures vary, and accordingly so does the bodies ability to use them. Its called a bioavailability factor. So in terms of use, 50 grams of egg protein is NOT the same as 50 grams of soy protein. You may have to take in a good deal more than you anticipate to compensate for this difference. Not saying it is impossible for a vegan to consume enough to survive, certanly it is something that is possible. You just have to evaluate the type of health you wish to have. On that, to each his own. >>


Once again, no disagreement there. My problem was this: fastball was making blanket statements that were blatantly untrue. I am not claiming it is health(ier) not to eat meat, but that you can be perfectly healthy, active, etc., in either state. Zealots of both sides are morons.



<< However, the studies that you found are very much under what may be required for an active individual, let alone one who is trying to gain muscle mass. >>


What kind of "gain" are you talking about? I put on 18lb of muscle in approx. 10 months my Freshman year of college, and was benching close to 300lb (reps of 200). That's not huge, by any means, but it is putting on muscle mass, and I didn't need meat to to it whatsoever.



<< under what may be required for an active individual, >>


Again, it appears that you're making blanket statements. What is, to you, an "active" individual? I think, by most terms, I would qualify as an active individual. I was ripped taking 55g of protein daily, while hiking; I was close to 4% body fat, and enjoying the hell out of it. For a bodybuilder, yes, you need that; to be healthy, active, etc., you don't. It's as simple as that.

Rob

 

[Looney]

I don't really see why some of you keep bashing moralpanic

Did you get my blacklist? If so, add Duffman to it.

 

[weezergirl]

<< Certainly for the average person, the levels of protein intake that we may consume is excessive. However, the studies that you found are very much under what may be required for an active individual, let alone one who is trying to gain muscle mass.
And please dont use the Arnold argument. 2 reason's why.
1. I would need to see adequate documentation to support this, and
2. It is pretty irrelevant anyway. Dude did enough roids to kill a horse.
Additionally, the sources of protein that may be in a Vegans diet are notoriously crap. 1 gram of protein does not universally equal 1 gram of protein. The structures vary, and accordingly so does the bodies ability to use them. Its called a bioavailability factor. So in terms of use, 50 grams of egg protein is NOT the same as 50 grams of soy protein. You may have to take in a good deal more than you anticipate to compensate for this difference. Not saying it is impossible for a vegan to consume enough to survive, certanly it is something that is possible. You just have to evaluate the type of health you wish to have. On that, to each his own. >>



champion weighlifter and vegan activist
advice on weightlifiting and being vegan

it's not as hard as you think.

 

[DuffmanOhYeah]

<< 20% is very different... but it could be very similar on what kind of studies you want to do. Primates are 98+% in similarities, including the digestive and anatomical system. But i wasn't refering to DNA differences, i was refering to anatomical and physiological differences, and primates and humans are extremely similar. >>


Ok, I am going to try to counter this as simply and succintly as possible so even YOU will understand. Here goes. You go eat like a gorilla (grasses and such) and when you weigh 350 pounds, come back and I will agree with you.
Do you understand the world of difference that 2% makes? With 3 billion or so base pairs in human DNA, a 2% difference translates to 66 million differences in nucleotide bases. Now imagine each of those being an expressive difference. That's quite different in my book. Your observation of anatomical and physiological differences don't mean jack sh!t

 

[DuffmanOhYeah]

<< Again, it appears that you're making blanket statements. What is, to you, an "active" individual? I think, by most terms, I would qualify as an active individual. I was ripped taking 55g of protein daily, while hiking; I was close to 4% body fat, and enjoying the hell out of it. For a bodybuilder, yes, you need that; to be healthy, active, etc., you don't. It's as simple as that >>


Chance in hell you were 4% bodyfat. That's on par with or lower than competitive bodybuilders today. Lowest I have ever seen was in the late Andreas Munzer, and he was at like 3%. No way you were close to that. Stop deluding yourself.

 

[DuffmanOhYeah]

<<

<< Certainly for the average person, the levels of protein intake that we may consume is excessive. However, the studies that you found are very much under what may be required for an active individual, let alone one who is trying to gain muscle mass.
And please dont use the Arnold argument. 2 reason's why.
1. I would need to see adequate documentation to support this, and
2. It is pretty irrelevant anyway. Dude did enough roids to kill a horse.
Additionally, the sources of protein that may be in a Vegans diet are notoriously crap. 1 gram of protein does not universally equal 1 gram of protein. The structures vary, and accordingly so does the bodies ability to use them. Its called a bioavailability factor. So in terms of use, 50 grams of egg protein is NOT the same as 50 grams of soy protein. You may have to take in a good deal more than you anticipate to compensate for this difference. Not saying it is impossible for a vegan to consume enough to survive, certanly it is something that is possible. You just have to evaluate the type of health you wish to have. On that, to each his own. >>



champion weighlifter and vegan activist
advice on weightlifiting and being vegan

it's not as hard as you think. >>



Please please please do not post stuff like this. If you were to mention something like this this in the weightlifting community, you would be ridiculed to no end. Go show this to Louie Simmons from Westside and he would first: laugh at you, and second: cook you in the oven and eat you. Tell you what, produce a champion Olympic lifter who is a vegan, and then we will talk.

 

[Entity]

<< Chance in hell you were 4% bodyfat. That's on par with or lower than competitive bodybuilders today. Lowest I have ever seen was in the late Andreas Munzer, and he was at like 3%. No way you were close to that. Stop deluding yourself. >>



Quick question for ya. Have you ever hiked 30 miles a day for 3 months? My caloric requirements were around 7000 per day. I, unfortunately, was only able to consume approximately 5000, on the average. I made up for it in some of my resupply towns, but on the average, I lost 2-3lb/week for the entirety of my time out there. I was 193lb before I left (this, at 6ft tall), and was rather muscular. My BFP was then calculated at approximately 18% by a test at my local gym. By the end of my hike, I was down to 175lb. According to most calculations I could find, that would put me at approximately 4-5% BFP.

Trust me when I say that I was 4% bodyfat. Many gymnasts hover at around the 3-4% rank.

I'm not claiming I should have been that low; regardless, I was. There was no more fat on me for me to lose; from there, I would have had to go into muscle cannibalization.

Just FYI - before you start calling bullsh*t, look around a bit. I moved at a consistent average of 3.5 miles per hour for 3 months straight, with an average of 25-30lb on my back. I was at average weight when I left for the hike, and was underweight when I got back. I know myself in terms of BFP, and I know what I was when I got back. Whether you believe it or not is something that, in all honesty, I could care less about.

Rob

 

[Looney]

Ok, I am going to try to counter this as simply and succintly as possible so even YOU will understand. Here goes. You go eat like a gorilla (grasses and such) and when you weigh 350 pounds, come back and I will agree with you.


First off, their rib structure is slightly larger. And second, if i spent all day doing nothing but eating grass, i probably would too.

Do you understand the world of difference that 2% makes? With 3 billion or so base pairs in human DNA, a 2% difference translates to 66 million differences in nucleotide bases. Now imagine each of those being an expressive difference.

And your point? That because there are 66 million different nucleotide bases, there are 66 million differences between primates and humans? LOL

Your observation of anatomical and physiological differences don't mean jack sh!t

Perhaps not, but how about the word of Professor Jonathan Marks?



<< Compared to a starfish, let?s say , humans and chimpanzees match in having bilateral symmetry, a central nervous system, a skeleton ? bone for bone, muscle for muscle, organ for organ, humans and chimps match right down the line. They?re not 98% physically identical, they are 100% identical, if your frame of reference is an echinoderm. >>



What It Really Means To Be 99% Chimpanzee

 

[DuffmanOhYeah]

<<

<< Chance in hell you were 4% bodyfat. That's on par with or lower than competitive bodybuilders today. Lowest I have ever seen was in the late Andreas Munzer, and he was at like 3%. No way you were close to that. Stop deluding yourself. >>



Quick question for ya. Have you ever hiked 30 miles a day for 3 months?

Trust me when I say that I was 4% bodyfat. Many gymnasts hover at around the 3-4% rank.

I'm not claiming I should have been that low; regardless, I was. There was no more fat on me for me to lose; from there, I would have had to go into muscle cannibalization.

Just FYI - before you start calling bullsh*t, look around a bit. I moved at a consistent average of 3.5 miles per hour for 3 months straight, with an average of 25-30lb on my back. I was at average weight when I left for the hike, and was underweight when I got back. I know myself in terms of BFP, and I know what I was when I got back. Whether you believe it or not is something that, in all honesty, I could care less about.

Rob >>


No, many gymnasts DO NOT hover around the 3-4% range. In fact, I have seen none that would even come close. Do you understand that the body holds more that subdermal fat? And I don't care what weight you left at and what you came back at. You were still nowhere close to 4% bf. And apparently you don't know crap about your bf%. Oh and by the "you couldn't care less"

 

[Looney]

Please please please do not post stuff like this. If you were to mention something like this this in the weightlifting community, you would be ridiculed to no end. Go show this to Louie Simmons from Westside and he would first: laugh at you, and second: cook you in the oven and eat you.

She showed you links to credit sources, and the only response you have is take it to a bunch of muscle heads that have been brainwashed by Weider and friends (so they can sell more of their supplements)? Please, you obviously lack the skill to continue in this thread.

 

[weezergirl]

<< Please please please do not post stuff like this. If you were to mention something like this this in the weightlifting community, you would be ridiculed to no end. Go show this to Louie Simmons from Westside and he would first: laugh at you, and second: cook you in the oven and eat you. Tell you what, produce a champion Olympic lifter who is a vegan, and then we will talk. >>



OH MY GOD, YOU ARE SO STUBBORN. even though she is not an olympic weight lifter you can't refute that fact that is an "active individual". which i THOUGHT was your point in the first place (oh yeah, i'm sure she can kick YOUR ass.. )

and just for you i dug up some more famous OLYMPIC athletes (there's more than one *gasp*). I just want to hear you say "Yes, weezergirl, you have shown me the light. You are right, you CAN be vegan and an active, healthy individual" come on..say it

 

[DuffmanOhYeah]

<< Ok, I am going to try to counter this as simply and succintly as possible so even YOU will understand. Here goes. You go eat like a gorilla (grasses and such) and when you weigh 350 pounds, come back and I will agree with you.


First off, their rib structure is slightly larger. And second, if i spent all day doing nothing but eating grass, i probably would too.

Do you understand the world of difference that 2% makes? With 3 billion or so base pairs in human DNA, a 2% difference translates to 66 million differences in nucleotide bases. Now imagine each of those being an expressive difference.

And your point? That because there are 66 million different nucleotide bases, there are 66 million differences between primates and humans? LOL

Your observation of anatomical and physiological differences don't mean jack sh!t

Perhaps not, but how about the word of Professor Jonathan Marks?




<< Compared to a starfish, let?s say , humans and chimpanzees match in having bilateral symmetry, a central nervous system, a skeleton ? bone for bone, muscle for muscle, organ for organ, humans and chimps match right down the line. They?re not 98% physically identical, they are 100% identical, if your frame of reference is an echinoderm. >>



What It Really Means To Be 99% Chimpanzee >>


Good for you, you have proved you are stupid yet again. I implore you, eat grass all day and see how you do. Think you will reach 350? Not on your life. And do you think that their

<< slightly larger >>

rib structure will account for a nearly 200% difference in body weight when they are substantially shorter then humans? Your statements are absolutely laughable. Secondly, you have made a huge error in your shift of scope. First you talk gorillas and then you talk chimpanzees. One is a hominid where the other is not. Again, millions of years of seperation of lineage. And it is quite funny. See that book on the page you have referred to "Demonic males"? Have you read it? Cause I have. Tell you what, you bone up on your bonobo behavior, and then we'll talk.