>>77054727
Bug difference between eating "plants" and eating the fruit of plants, champ
Ur not supposed to eat literal grasses

>>77054727
Humans are hunters they are not adapted to eat grass and indigestible tubers.

>>77054727
OP BTFO
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2752538/

>>77054734
>functional retards that died at 30 only ate meat
yeah you're right, that's unironically exactly what the OP says

>>77054730
They've found cooked starchy rhizomes in Africa 170,000 years ago, and ground sorghum starch on stone tools at least 100,000 years ago. And it's likely the start is much further back then that.

>>77054734
i deboonked ya already >>77054723

File: maybe read a book or something.png (158.3 KB)

158.3 KB PNG

>>77054730
Unfortunately, you're a retard

>>77054727
>>retards on the internet that sell supplements tell you that half the things you have been eating since the dawn of time is poison, actually
You have a small misunderstanding here
Todays plants are not the same as 4000 years ago or 100,000 years ago
also todays environment is heavily toxic
todays land is heavily tilled which mean that plants have less micronutrients which means that animals have less micronutrients
supplements are only way you can get those minerals and micronutrients nowadays

>>77054779
You have a small misunderstanding here
The supplements these people sell you do not fix these problems
they just want your money and you fell for it because you're a retard

File: img_0984.jpg (259.2 KB)

259.2 KB JPG

>>77054779
>Todays plants are not the same as 4000 years ago or 100,000 years ago
They are the same as 200,000,000 years ago even mate

File: modern vs old tomato.jpg (8.6 KB)

8.6 KB JPG

>>77054784
look into overtilling and loss of micronutrients in the soil
you have a lack of magnesium for sure since 80% of people do
I would bet you have lack of copper as well

>>77054790
not the ones we eat, which is what we're discussing here

>>77054799
>doesn't respond
https://www.amazon.com/Ancestral-Supplements-Grass-Liver-Desiccated/dp/B01MSBZYQW?th=1
lol

File: fnut-09-806566-g001.jpg (830.4 KB)

830.4 KB JPG

>>77054806
it's almost as if liver is the most micronutrient rich food

>>77054744
>They've found cooked starchy rhizomes in Africa 170,000 years ago
Who found that 170'000 years ago, are you saying they also had papyrus or something back then how did they document they found it ?

>>77054730
>Humans are hunters they are not adapted to eat grass and indigestible tubers.
The human brain wins over all, the body does not have to be adapted to eat grass (seed, I think you mean) and raw tubers, the human brain (which is apart of the human) allows for the cooking of these things that make them digestible.

>>77054744
You wouldn't have to cook it if you were adapted to eating it.

>>77054779
Everything you just said also applies to animal foods.

>>77054860
it tastes better and is easier to chew. you only eat raw meat?

also, can you explain to me the why a chemical process that occurs due to an anatomical adaptation is inherently better than a chemical process occurring outside the body due to a behavioral adaptation? what about birds that swallow stones to use to grind in their gizzards, ants that ferment leaves, all that jazz?

>>77054881
You wouldn't need it to be easier to chew to to improve the taste if you were adapted to eating it.

>>77054885
>>77054849
It is the human brain that makes humans superior above all, a human doesnt need 4 stomachs like a cow to regurgitate etc, because they can make things easier to digest.

Have you ever been outside and seen those 2 tonne metal things going by at 80mph ?

The human body is not adapted to travelling 80mph, yet the brain makes it happen.

>>77054893
I didn't ask for an irrelevant, unrelated post in response. But thanks anyway.

>>77054899
Maybe you don't have a brain.

>>77054885
and birds that drop clams and mussels onto rocks to eat them wouldn't need to if they were adapted to eating them. racoons wouldn't wash their food to soften it. and shrikes definitely wouldn't impale prey on thorns for days so their toxins degrade

>>77054901
And maybe leprechauns are real.

>>77054904
Yeah, you're right. All of the examples that you just gave chemically change the makeup of the food, just like cooking.

>>77054905
Maybe clover is full of anti-leprechauns

>>77054779
>Todays plants are not the same as 4000 years ago or 100,000 years ago
They are much better now.

>>77054907
>chemically change the makeup of the food
like the shrike's toxic grasshoppers becoming non-toxic?
also think technically softening it by heat is a structural rather than chemical change, like softening it by soaking in water or grinding it with swallowed stones instead of teeth

>>77054807
Why would you need supplements if you're eating a balanced diet of both plants and animals

>>77054747
Yet they curiously found no "vegetal protein" LMAO also you're wrong it's a comprehensive study

>>77054972
You dont need supplements if you eat liver and fruit, you need supplements if you eat rice and broccoli and chicken breasts and flax seed or whatever garbage you've seen sam sulek eat
you're hiding behind such a weird boogeyman just go to the subreddits of these influencers instead of arguing with people who are more interested in nutrition than e-celeb gossip

>>77054920
>also think technically softening it by heat is a structural rather than chemical change, like softening it by soaking in water or grinding it with swallowed stones instead of teeth
They are all chemical changes

Omnivores only revert to plants in cases of starvation or if they're essentially herbivore like pigs they switch to cannibalism if they're starving
You will never see a dog eating apples or synthetic dogfeed over real meat. Humans also arent strict carnivores the way cats are meaning they can get SOME energy and FEW nutrients from plants but on the long run they become malnourished and weak and underdeveloped if they predominantly eat plants

>>77054727
>grow more nutritious grains
grains have zero nutrients that you can absorb
humans slowly starve on a pure grains diet
the minerals are bound to antinutrients and the vitamins aren't bioavailable

It's also interesting to note that wild boars are oppurtinistic feeders when it comes to meat. They only eat small prey if it's readily available and incapacitated in some way, and for bigger prey they never hunt it and just scavenge remains, and obviously in cases of starvation.
The same way humans actively look for meat but are oppurtinistic towards berries and other fruits.

>>77055025
>you need supplements if you eat rice and broccoli
Source?

>>77055069
Every gymcel alive.

>>77054972
we went over this, your "balanced diet" is lacking micronutrients and minerals

>>77055217
No you retard I'm talking about the people doing carnivore diets and buying supplements despite that.

>>77054727
>How is this still a debate?
Willful ignorance from vegans and other retards like vegans.

Humans on large scale, are just not intelligent enough to handle the internet with any sort of dignity

>>77054727
interesting note, pigs are so similar to humans that we can use them for organ transplants.

>>77055047
>grains have zero nutrients that you can absorb
Shit you fucking made up.
>the minerals are bound to antinutrients
Lectin is deactivated when you bake wheat. That's part of why we do that you absolute fucking retard. Do you know anyone who eats grain raw like a cow?

>>77054841
This is your brain on carnitardism.

>>77055078
>only eat 3 foods
>needs supplements
Yeah no shit but how does this make vegetables bad

>>77055353
True carnivore would imply cutting coffee/tea and eating liver. They're not doing carnivore and you cant have ANY carence if you eat organs regularly. To complement organs you can just add fruits which doesn't make it carni anymore but you get the point.
Still a more complete micro AND macronutrients profile than your "balanced" vegetarian trash

>>77055716
Nobody said anything about vegetarianism dipshit. Your meme diet being better than another meme diet means zero.

The point is that humans eat plants and animals and thus you should also eat plants and animals, which you yourself admit.

>>77054727
>BC
>CE
Agnostics.

>>77055040
>You will never see a dog eating apples or synthetic dogfeed over real meat
Wtf are you talking about? Dogs generally prefer treats to real meat. The fact that you think they can tell a difference is hilarious.
>but on the long run they become malnourished and weak and underdeveloped if they predominantly eat plants
Based on what? Plants are almost always associated with less disease and decreased mortality.

>>77054734
>They got most of their protein from the things made of protein
Wow thanks einstein really needed ya for that one.

Anyone who disagrees with the idea that vegetables are good for you was told by their mommy to eat their veggies before dessert and never got over it.

>>77054727
Actual omnivores have an actual caecum. Look at diagrams of pig and chimpanzee digestive systems. Compare that to a diagram of a human's. Notice that the human has a shriveled appendix where the caecum used to be.
Similar to dogs (OP is retarded, as usual).

File: Screenshot_20260202-083257_Chrome.jpg (433.1 KB)

433.1 KB JPG

>>77054972
Because some of those plant "foods" literally prevent you from absorbing nutrients.

>>77057811
post your source for the class so they can see where you get your info
https://revitalizemetabolichealth.com/nutritional-bioavailability-zinc/

and the 1979 study they quote
https://hero.epa.gov/reference/56527/
>Oysters and herring, two foods reported to be extraordinarily rich in zinc, were used to determine whether such foods could be used in conjunction with serial measurements of plasma zinc concentration to quantify the absorption of zinc in man. A dose of 120 gm of Atlantic oysters contained 108 mg of elemental zinc and produced a mean elevation in plasma zinc of 142 ± 22 Ág/dl (mean ± S.E.M.) at 3 hr after ingestion. Both black beans and corn tortillas, at intakes of 120 gm, decreased the bioavailability of zinc from oysters, and inhibition was significantly greater by tortillas than by beans. In the presence of black beans, equivalent doses of elemental zinc as ZnSO4À 7H20 and as oysters produced indistinguishable plasma zinc patterns. In the presence of tortillas, absorption was slightly greater from inorganic zinc than from oysters, but the biological importance of this difference is unclear. A dose of 120 gm of the herring used in this study contained only 2 mg of elemental zinc. When 70 gm of tortillas were ingested with the herring, plasma zinc concentration declined significantly. For Atlantic oyster, the richest known animal source of zinc, no evidence for a distinct, more available pool of dietary zinc, analagous to the "heme iron" pool of dietary iron, was demonstrable. Our data did show the effective use of Atlantic oysters as a source of organic zinc in the study in humans of the absorption and bioavailability of zinc.

presuming you stand by the methodology of assuming heightened levels in the blood plasma a few hours after eating demonstrate amount of overall bioabsorption, interesting that they specifically state that inorganic zinc supplementation was just as good (actually better than the oyster when a tortilla was involved)

>>77057811
Looking at that graph, the graph almost looks truncated since it doesn't continue until levels go to zero. Like if graphed over the total digestion period, including the gut, you'd see just oysters provide an immediate spike while eating with other food means a longer, lower release. Reminds me of glycemic index. Wonder what the totals would look like by the end? I wonder if measuring blood plasma like that even makes sense as a way to measure absorption... is the goal to have it float around in the blood, or to make its way to cells and processes in the body. What if the beans and tortillas actually were more immediately used for those purposes instead of sitting in the blood? Maybe GI is even directly related, like quicker release of sugars powers it.
>>77058201
>used to determine whether such foods could be used in conjunction with serial measurements of plasma zinc concentration to quantify the absorption of zinc in man
Sounds like they were evaluating the methodology as much as the absorption, even.

>>77058201
>>77058261
Cope more, vegoids. Antinutrients are real.

File: Screenshot_20260203-135624_Chrome.jpg (751.9 KB)

751.9 KB JPG

>>77058406

>>77058406
don't forget glyphosate
that's why i'd never eat oysters, they filter feed all that agripoison runoff

>>77058419
cooking and soaking legumes and grains removes phytic acid.
>ok?
Eat veg and meat DYEL.

>>77058438
It does not remove it. It reduces it.
Corn tortillas should be nixtamalyzed, if they're made traditionally, and will still bind zinc.
Corn in it's non-nixtamalyzed state, merely boiled as Americans eat, will also leach niacin leading to Pellagra. This happened a lot in Europe when they were first exposes to corn.
This is all to say that corn is not part of our species' natural diet. Neither are beans.

>>77058438
People whine that you can just cook the antinutrients out of vegetables but also forget that they're already poor in nutrients in their raw form so when you cook them you're just reducing them to fiber or sugar + microdosed poison. Yes even steaming does that.
I have been avoiding vegetables for a couple years now, only eat fruit vegetable-adjacent plants like pumpkins usually or sometimes tomatoes (cherry, big tomatoes are horrendous) and i have 0 carence unlike the average gymcel gobbling down veg frozen mixes (all nutrients destroyed by freezing then by the reheating process) and multis and still feel like shit all the tile

>>77058456
you understand that they contain more nutrients than what it canceled by the negligible phytic acid right... Surely you aren't this retarded

>>77058474
That's definitely not always true. In the case of corn or other grains, it is absolutely false.
In the case of spinach, for example, is it worth eating something that will leach calcium from my bones just to get a little bit of iron that isn't as bioavailable as what I could find from meat? I don't think so.
Not to mention the fact that spinach is way more expensive. What's the point? They're simply inferior.

PLANTS ARE POISON!

>>77058474
Vegetables are the poorest source of nutrients. They have laughable quantities, the soil is depleted and on top of all most modern vegetables are not only selected only for visual and taste traits which overrides nutrient profiles but are also awfully nutritionally poor GMOs. Not to mention the antinutrients that cancel whatever 1% DV of vitamin A you were supposed to get. Overall a net negative, eat fruits plus liver and you'll be fine, and they dont taste like shit and need 10 different spices and steamed then stir fried to taste palatable you can just bite a banana and get the micronutrient equivalent of 1kg of beans

>>77058474
Look man, I get that you have an agenda to push, but /fit/ is a carnivore board. Maybe Reddit would be more to your liking.

>>77058560
If /fit/ were a carnivore board, you wouldn't have to spend all this time every day seething about rice and broccoli

>>77058496
Source on a single fucking argument you're making?

>>77058496
Cool, but people who eat more veggies tend to have less disease and decreased mortality rates.

>>77058783
The children don't like to eat veggies mom!

>>77058783
They always dodge this one.

>>77058783
>>77058797
>>77058840
Wrong. And this is an actual controlled study not the epidemiological garbage you guys usually tout lol
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41391640/

>>77059642
Conclusions: Targeting individuals of advanced age (80+ y) in China, we found that individuals following a vegetarian diet had a lower likelihood of becoming centenarians relative to omnivores,
>becoming centenarians relative to omnivores
>relative to omnivores
>OMNIVORES

MEATKEKS ARE SO RETARDEEEEEED

>>77060160
The study doesn't control to carnivore diet obviously but if anything it shows vegetables as a hinderance for longevity.

>>77060173
No you stupid faggot, it shows that you need both meat AND vegetables to live a long life. How is it so unimaginable that consuming a multitude of food sources is the best way to live? Pull out a carnitard longevity study. I'll wait.

>>77054727
Imagine believing nutritional soience paid for by lobby groups, kelloggs, sanitarium and the medical industrial complex.
You need saturated fats, and less carbohydrate/sugars.
A faggot thinks vegetables and fruits and grains are essential. They are "eat least" foods.

>>77060178
>Study clearly shows the less vegetables you eat the more you live
>Oxalatebrain does olympic tier mental gymnastics to find a way out
Kek

>>77060221
Moroccan and spanish food are utter garbage but what's moroco's business in this anyways at least spain shares some things in common with italy and greece

>>77060227
>Study clearly shows the less vegetables you eat the more you live
Would you like to point to the exact line that says that, retard?

>>77060233
>if it doesn't say that line exactly I don't buy it
I believe you wouldn't buy it if it said that line exactly at all. Literalists like you are plebbit tier autists that can't do anything but defend their intellectualist identity that even a simple inference is hard without some expert spoonfeeding you opinions to hold (until science changes, of course)

>>77060236
>"it doesn't actually say that; I just can't comprehend abstracts"
Concession: A C C E P T E D

>>77060258
I wasn't even the anon you originally had argument with, I am just fascinated by people like you and constant desire of yours to be right, as if that will give you more money or make you more healthy
It won't, and your little ego boost from your imaginary "win" will mean nothing

>>77060263
>I am just fascinated by people like you and constant desire of yours to be right
Similarly, I am just fascinated by people like you and the constant ability to be wrong.

>Conclusions: Targeting individuals of advanced age (80+ y) in China, we found that individuals following a vegetarian diet had a lower likelihood of becoming centenarians relative to omnivores, underscoring the importance of a balanced, high-quality diet with animal- and plant-derived food composition for exceptional longevity, especially in the underweight oldest-old.

Have you considered an omniverous diet, anon? It may increase your IQ and your ability to read.

>Study results clearly pinpoint that vegetarians (minimal animal consumption) live less than "omnivores" (MAINLY animal products consumption) live way longer than green leaves eating pseudo-cows
>Durrr i need you to spell it out for me please jump into my endless hoops of semantics

>>77060279
There's just one problem retard, you said:
>Study clearly shows the less vegetables you eat the more you live
Except it DOESN'T show that. It shows that there is an ideal combo of meat AND vegetables that should be eaten for longevity. The endpoint of your statement,
>Study clearly shows the less vegetables you eat the more you live
would imply that the best way to live would be to eat NO vegetables, as that is the "least amount of vegetables" possible to eat. But the study doesn't actually say that, does it retard? No it does not. Therefore, no amount of qualifiers ("MAINLY" animal products—says who?) would, even if correct, actually support your statement. The study is conclusive: eat animals, AND plants. Not plants instead of animals, and not animals instead of plants.

Is this hard for you to understand? Is your brain imploding? Did you think you cooked with this post kiddo? Awwwwww, poor bwaby doesn't wanna eat his vegetals!!

>>77060291
Your problem is that you cant comprehend that omnivore still means +70% animal products completely overriding the supposed longevity benefit of plants a vegetarian diet of +60-70% plant based diet and thus also overriding most if not all the supposed benefits of plants.
You're autistic so you probably think omnivorous or "balanced" means 50/50 meanwhile that would be +70/20 or even 90/10 the plant part mainly being fruits.

>>77060317
>omnivore still means +70% animal products
>source: my ass

>completely overriding the supposed longevity benefit of plants a vegetarian diet of +60-70% plant based diet
>source: my ass

>You're autistic so you probably think omnivorous or "balanced" means 50/50 meanwhile that would be +70/20 or even 90/10 the plant part mainly being fruits.
>source: my ass

So we're on the "well carnitardism doesn't mean 100% meat it just means anywhere from 70-90% meat!" part of the argument, are we? How far the mighty have fallen! The Liver King would be *very* disappointed in you anon.

>>77054728

Correct. You do realise that we only eat the fruit(the grain) of grasses?

>>77060323
You're having a meltdown anon. Are the carnivores with us in the room right now? What next are you gona call me a ketoschizo, we havent gotten to that part of your mental breakdown yet

>>77060323
phytochud melty

File: zsvxodizg3y21.jpg (145.8 KB)

145.8 KB JPG

>>77060340
>>77060342
Attempting to look aloof and disconnected now that you've lost the argument? That's a classic! But you can't back down when you've already said something as silly as "study clearly shows the less vegetables you eat the more you live."

>Imagine, drying out your mouth to the point where it can't move knowing your colon is doing the same...

>>77060353
Longitudinal studies and metaanalyses show that reducing carbs increases your lifespan. Insulin is for homeostasis, not for adapting to your constant carbohydrate intake. The insulin levels that people are forcing on their body are neurotoxic, hepatotoxic, etc. Carbohydrates should be considered poisonous, but people love their treats, like cigarettes or alcohol.

>>77060360
>Longitudinal studies and metaanalyses show that reducing carbs increases your lifespan
Yeah if you eat too much of them obviously. You die if you eat too much of something important. Fun fact, you die if you eat too little of something important also.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(18)30135-X/fulltext

>>77060353
Why are you so emotionally invested lol btw you've never posted any study or brought any point of your own you just keep screeching "noooo" at every post that disagrees with you like a little child there's dozen of saaar studies to pick from about dietary plant producs being the panacea to every ailment

File: ija0wg292c491.jpg (32.6 KB)

32.6 KB JPG

>>77060369
>no no no no no no no!! where's YOUR study??
The study that was posted said everything I wanted to say by itself; there's no need to bring up another one. Thank you very much for posting it!

>>77060368
The ideal points on that plot comport with a ketogenic diet. It's not zero carb, it's LIMITED carb.

>>77060379
>LIMITED carb
>limited carb
>50-55% of calories
Do you guys like, read the stuff that gets posted

>>77060386
>>limited carb
>>50-55% of calories
That includes fiber too, because our nutritional guidelines are retarded. Learn to fucking read.

>>77054734
Thread was over 80 replies ago

>>77060407
>That includes fiber too
Fiber is mentioned zero times in the study.
>Learn to fucking read.

>>77060291
>It shows that there is an ideal combo of meat AND vegetables that should be eaten for longevity.
It doesn't show this either. If it examined Chinese populations that ate no plants and those people lived shorter lives than the people eating both plants and animals, only then could you make this conclusion.

>>77060423
>If it examined Chinese populations that ate no plants and those people lived shorter lives than the people eating both plants and animals, only then could you make this conclusion.
why post this to promote a carnivore diet then. at best it's an irrelevant study

>>77060407
if you're going to argue this then you're arguing in favor of eating plants since that will keep you in the low mortality zone while limiting "carb intake"

>PLEASE keep microdosing poisonous green plants
If you beg daddy some more and cook them for me you vegan sissy femboy i might cave in after running a train on your gaped fiberussy

>>77060438
this is the kind of "high test" posting you can expect from a carnivore diet

>>77055026
>grinding something up is a chemical change
are we serious with this

>>77054727
our genes to produce essential vitamins and minerals broke down over those 4 million years, most animals can't get scurvy but humans can

>>77060368
>we had people take two surveys on what they ate, 25 years apart
>this is science.

>>77060462
This retard skipped highschool lol "crushing onion mitochondria experiment" google it, it will blow your mind
>>77060466
This retard also never heard of liver
Scurvy is just what you get when you eat no animal organs and stick to muscle meat and plants

>>77060471
You're free to post an alternate study at any time.

>>77060480
>"crushing onion mitochondria experiment" google it
nothing comes up for this

>>77060407
>That includes fiber too, because our nutritional guidelines are retarded. Learn to fucking read.
The study is studying carbs as a function of caloric intake, which would necessarily exclude fiber, unless you're going to say that humans are deriving huge amounts of energy specifically from fiber all of a sudden.

>>77060515
I'm suggesting that the study fails to accurately observe "carbohydrate energy" because "carbs" will necessarily include fiber. The real intake of carbohydrates for energy is probably like 15-20% in the ideal group, at most.

>>77060610
...Except the study as outlined completely controls for this, so I don't understand why this would be your concern. They're deriving carb ratios from measured calories, not the other way around.

>>77054799
What a stupid person you must be, and that's a stupid comparison. You can grow heirloom variety tomato (right) right now. Left is a Better Boy or something cultivated for canning. Nutritionally they're the same. The "difference" between them is superficial.

>>77055020
>didn't read the study
typical
>>77060414
if you insist on it hard enough, maybe it'll be true

>>77054770
very cool

>>77054727
Its because industries and goverments appeal to female consoomerism. They pick up on retarded female trends to promote and sell the next retarded shit. I have a gigafeminist vegeratian female coworker. Shes severely malnourished and speaks the most retarded paragraphs stolen from netflix and twatter. Her bloodworks are abysmal and "she doesnt understands why, its X, Y and Z condition probably". Im seriously concerned about how a person can have a college degree and be this fucking retarded at the same time.

We’ve evolved to no longer eat ruminant animals. We can’t break down neu5gc anymore. Eating beef, lamb and pork will release said compound and have it stick to our arteries increasing the risk of cancers. Red meat is poison is modern humans. It’s the most inflammatory food in the world. Only meat you need is poultry and seafood