Chowing Down On Meat, Dairy Alters Gut Bacteria A Lot, And Quickly

[-RC-]

Just gunna wade in with the token hemp foods plug.

Hemp seed oil for the optimum Omega 3 to 6 ratio along with a bunch of other shit. No mercury, get it organic of course.

Good for the brain, good for the environment.

Just to add to the digestion side of things also, in terms of meat vs say spirulina, the bio-availability of spirulina makes it much more easily taken up and utilised by the body. This is worth noting particularly in terms of the immune system, in that digestion requires quite a bit of the body's energetic resources, so if you are sick or have a chronic illness the last thing you want is to be eating something that is going to tax your already taxed reserves.

Also I'm sure I've heard it somewhere that most cooked food triggers some sort of immune response upon entering the body, but I can't be fucked looking it up.

Spurious? Sort of, but I'm sure there is something to it.

As far as vegan vs omni, do whatever you feel is right for you I reckon, and listen to your body. If your ears aren't working properly mother aya can give you a pretty good idea, if you ask her nicely....

... and by the way, lacking tone? Chuck an emoticon in there, or not

[tripsis]

They have adapted to it over many generations, if most of us tried to do it we would make ourselves sick from a nutritional deficiency and probably would end up dying from severe constipation. Besides, I’m sure they survive just fine, but at the same time I don’t think the Inuits are famous for living amazingly healthy and long lived lives. Just because something might not kill ya doesn't automatically make it healthy.

What do you think evolution is? We have evolved to eat meat. Period. Do you know why the Inuit can survive on a diet of almost only animal? It's because they eat the organs and stomach contents too. They get all the vitamins and minerals they need by consuming the whole animal, as well as some of what the animal has also eaten. We could do that too. For the sake of argument however, let's assume we couldn't. So what? Almost every other culture on earth traditionally eaten meat, meaning that they have "adapted to it over many generations". If it conferred ill health, it would have been selected against.

I disagree, the body is amazingly efficient at turning food into usable energy, but even the human body has it's limits. I personally believe (and have read) there’s only so much it can convert at any one time.

On what basis do you disagree? Provide some credible evidence.

[Subaeruginosin]

Anyway, the Inuits ate wild game that was very high in omega 3. Also, humans in general have evolved on lean wild game with very little saturated fat, which is completely different to the majority of domesticated meat most people eat these days.

Besides, I think we might be getting a little carried away here, since I don’t think I ever claimed meat was evil and inherently unhealthy. Just that it was a luxury and in no way vital for a healthy diet. Plus I personally believe in a first world diet of abundant carbs, sugars and fats that meat is a major contributor in making as overweight.

Sure meat was a super food in the past when we had to pack on the fat quickly during good times to see us though the lean times, but now we don’t have that problem I personally think meat might be doing more bad than good.

On what basis do you disagree? Provide some credible evidence.

Lol, why should the burden of proof be on me? I clearly stated it was just a theory of mine, whereas you claimed it as fundamentally and factually wrong. I think the burden of proof should be on you, since you’re the one making claims, I was just merely putting a theory across of which I have heard before.

[Subaeruginosin]

Id love to see these abs

Yeah, who could blame ya, your only human I suppose. Everybody loves the white trash blondes.

[C_T]

all meat isn't equal, its only as healthy as the animal it came from.

same with eggs, how they get omega 3 eggs? they feed them seeds high in omega 3, this then influences the profile of the egg and meat.

thats the problem with the "science" of these days, its not a very good correlation anymore, the meat most people eat isn't from wild game, its from sick mass produced animals with artificial feed, hormones and antibiotics.

add that with refined carbohydrates/sugars and you have a recipe for disaster.

same with milk, its not the healthy raw milk from healthy cows anymore, its mass produced, stressed and sick animals... thats not good for anybody. but it is a multi billion dollar industry.

[Sallubrious]

Personally I wouldn't go vegetarian or vegan for the reasons Tripsis mentioned. I tried it for a while but it just wasn't suitable for me.

Back to the meat issue.

Here's an article about two men who were studied under controlled clinical conditions who existed on a high fat pure meat diet for a year. They suffered no health problems & lost weight while at times eating over their expected calorie requirements for their sedentary lifestyles. Constipation was never an issue, in fact diareah was a complication in the early stages of the experiment when the doctors went against Stefanssons reommendation of a high fat intake and fed them lean meat.

One of the subjects in the study (Stefansson) had existed exclusively of fish and meat for over 5 years prior to the study and the study was undertaken basically because doctors believed it was impossible and wanted to disprove him in a controlled clinical setting. He had lived with Eskimo's during that period and noted their excellent health and lack of chronic disease until they started eating refined "white mans food"

http://inhumanexperiment.blogspot.com.au/2009/09/two-brave-men-who-ate-nothing-but-meat.html

To the surprise of many (including Stefansson himself), he suffered no health problems during his decade of pure carnivorism. When he told people of his amazing experiences, he was met with skepticism from medical authorities who asked him to undertake a study that would replicate the results. He and a fellow explorer named Andersen agreed to eat an all-meat diet for an entire year in a closely observed setting.

Though neither man was overweight to begin with, and weight loss was not the goal of the experiment, both men lost a few pounds during the year. This was despite the fact that calorie intakes ranged from 2,000 to 3,100 kcal. Stefansson averaged about 2,650 kcal (2,100 from fat and 550 from protein), while Andersen averaged 2,620 kcal (2,100 from fat and 510 from protein).

A link to the actual study from the journal of biological chemistry

http://www.jbc.org/content/87/3/651.full.pdf+html

And links to Stefanssons own article

Eskimos Prove An All Meat Diet Provides Excellent Health Part 1

http://mendosa.com/stefansson1.htm

Eskimos Prove An All Meat Diet Provides Excellent Health Part 2

http://mendosa.com/stefansson2.htm

Eskimos Prove An All Meat Diet Provides Excellent Health Part 3

http://mendosa.com/stefansson3.htm

Edited December 13, 2013 by Sally

[tripsis]

Besides, I think we might be getting a little carried away here, since I don’t think I ever claimed meat was evil and inherently unhealthy. Just that it was a luxury and in no way vital for a healthy diet. Plus I personally believe in a first world diet of abundant carbs, sugars and fats that meat is a major contributor in making as overweight.

I never said you claimed meat was evil, though you have implied - more than once - that it is unhealthy.

Sure meat was a super food in the past when we had to pack on the fat quickly during good times to see us though the lean times, but now we don’t have that problem I personally think meat might be doing more bad than good.

Except meat doesn't do that.

Lol, why should the burden of proof be on me? I clearly stated it was just a theory of mine, whereas you claimed it as fundamentally and factually wrong. I think the burden of proof should be on you, since you’re the one making claims, I was just merely putting a theory across of which I have heard before.

There is plenty of evidence to support what I said, not difficult to find it if you actually care to educate yourself. This purported "theory" - is it yours, as you initially claimed, or someone else's, as would be the case if you read it somewhere? If the latter, then where did you read it and what was the evidence? Considering this "theory" appears to be based on a flawed understanding of digestion, it doesn't strike me as credible.

[C_T]

they are eating wild meat, not supermarket meat. its not the same, you will get heath problems eating an unhealthy plant OR animal.

im not against any "food". so long as you know its source.

you know when you go for your phd and write a paper, you can't just choose any topic you like, thats a myth. you have professor who wants certain things investigated, and they will tell you what they want you to write. i don't trust a single study these days, common sense has my bullshit meter in the red. and the fact i am my own walking experiment.

[tripsis]

same with eggs, how they get omega 3 eggs? they feed them seeds high in omega 3, this then influences the profile of the egg and meat.

That is one way. A natural diet high in greens and insects, as would be found in freely ranging chickens, results in omega 3 too.

[Subaeruginosin]

I never said you claimed meat was evil, though you have implied - more than once - that it is unhealthy.

Yeah, well just to be clear I don’t think all meat is unhealthy. In fact I think some meat (like some oily fish and lean wild game) would probably be very healthy. But imo most of the domesticated meat people eat these days that’s drenched in hormones and all the rest is probably not very good for us at all and is probably (imho) a major factor in the obesity epidemic within our society.

Except meat doesn't do that.

Ok, now you really have lost me! If meat isn’t a really efficient source of energy (and there for fat if you eat more than you expend) then why did our ancestors spend all that time expending thousands of calories running around in the hot sun to hunt meat down? If “meat doesn’t do that” as you have so arrogantly claimed then wouldn’t they have been better of just calmly digging for tubers high in carbohydrates?

There is plenty of evidence to support what I said, not difficult to find it if you actually care to educate yourself. This purported "theory" - is it yours, as you initially claimed, or someone else's, as would be the case if you read it somewhere? If the latter, then where did you read it and what was the evidence? Considering this "theory" appears to be based on a flawed understanding of digestion, it doesn't strike me as credible.

I’ve read the same theory multiple times, in articles about dieting or on body building forums and such, they all say if your going to eat a big meal do it within an hour because there’s only so much energy your body can convert at anyone time. There is no point giving a link because it’s not taken from any scientific journal, it’s just an opinion from people who like to stay lean and to be completely honest with you dude, it’s just common fricking sense!

I really am going to go out here and suggest maybe it’s is you who lacks the understanding of how food is digested. Fact is, I eat like a pig quite regularly and still have a BMI of 21.4, so that’s my evidence!

If your claim had any basis in reality then there wouldn’t be those people who can eat whatever they want without getting fat, since your claiming everything that gets eaten must become energy and then fat if the energy is not used.

Here's an article about two men who were studied under controlled clinical conditions who existed on a high fat pure meat diet for a year. They suffered no health problems & lost weight while at times eating over their expected calorie requirements for their sedentary lifestyles. Constipation was never an issue, in fact diareah was a complication in the early stages of the experiment when the doctors went against Stefanssons reommendation of a high fat intake and fed them lean meat.

That’s just one example, hardly scientific. I still stand by my claim that most people would become sick from an all meat diet for a long period of time, without the aid of added vitamins. The few kilos of weight loss btw would have obviously been expected from loss of water retention from not eating carbs. I'm not totally against no carb diets anyway, I get on them occasionally when I want to quickly loss that water retention and look cut. Do it for longer than two weeks though and I barely have enough energy to move, so I refuse to believe it's healthy in the long term.

Edited December 14, 2013 by Subaeruginosin

[tripsis]

This is beginning to get a little exasperating.

Ok, now you really have lost me! If meat isn’t a really efficient source of energy (and there for fat if you eat more than you expend) then why did our ancestors spend all that time expending thousands of calories running around in the hot sun to hunt meat down? If “meat doesn’t do that” as you have so arrogantly claimed then wouldn’t they have been better of just calmly digging for tubers high in carbohydrates?

Meat is a energy source, yes. Protein is also is the most difficult macronutrient to digest, so almost 30% of the energy gained from it is expended in digesting it (i.e. thermogenesis). Carbohydrates are the body's preferred energy source. It is also the one that is most easily converted to fat. Big, easily spotted animals are an obvious target for hunter-gatherers, which yield a lot of food for the effort expended. Digging into the ground for half a day to obtain a kilo of tubers high in carbohydrates is simply not as productive.

This:

 

 

Vs. this:

 

 

I’ve read the same theory multiple times, in articles about dieting or on body building forums and such, they all say if your going to eat a big meal do it within an hour because there’s only so much energy your body can convert at anyone time. There is no point giving a link because it’s not taken from any scientific journal, it’s just an opinion from people who like to stay lean and to be completely honest with you dude, it’s just common fricking sense!

It's your "common fricking sense" that's leading you down the path of flawed logic and false conclusions. So there's no point in linking to anything, because what you're saying has no credible, scientific basis? You might as well quit pretending you know what you're talking about then, if all you're doing is parroting other people's baseless opinions.

I really am going to go out here and suggest maybe it’s is you who lacks the understanding of how food is digested. Fact is, I eat like a pig quite regularly and still have a BMI of 21.4, so that’s my evidence!

That's not evidence, that's you basing broad statements on your limited individual experience of the world. If anything, that suggests you have a fast basal metabolic rate.

If your claim had any basis in reality then there wouldn’t be those people who can eat whatever they want without getting fat, since your claiming everything that gets eaten must become energy and then fat if the energy is not used.

Stop digging yourself a hole and go back and read through what I've written. I have already touched on this point. Metabolism. Go do some research.

Also, don't going putting words into my mouth. Never once did I state that everything that is eaten in converted to energy. There is a difference between eating food and digesting food. If the food is digested, it will enter the blood stream. However, not everything you eat will necessarily be digested. Perhaps this is what you've been attempting to say?

And now, I'm over this. I have better things to do with my time than argue with you. Go on, have the last word, you know you want to.

Edited December 14, 2013 by tripsis

[Xenodimensional]

I tend to steer clear of these kinds of discussions, too divisive but I'll throw my 2c in for what it's worth. I've been herbivorous for most of my life, ate meat in great quantities between ages of 8 and 14. That's the only time period that I was obese in. During the past 20 years of herbivorousness I have not been deficient in iron or B12. Since focusing on having a decent amount of quality proteins (or more correctly amino acids) in my diet over the past year I have with minimal effort put on an estimated 5-8 kilos of muscle mass.

I do believe we are designed to be omnivorous but not to eat large terrestrial animals and definitely not aquatic animals. More like grubs and beetles etc. Look at the types of foods that humans will eat beyond feeling full. Not just you, everyone. I can think of very few, grapes and figs come to mind. We don't have a strongly developed killing instinct, the fact that vegetarians exist (and that an even larger portion of society is so squeamish about blood/killing) pretty much supports that. My guess is that the eating of large terrestrial animals arose out of need, or rather lack of suitable dietary fulfilment. Whether or not we are adapted to eat meat (and I don't think we are) we are not very well adapted to eat cooked food. Cooking food causes enzymes to denature and proteins to 'tangle' more which makes them much harder to digest. Eating raw meat makes almost all humans sick. Anyway, I'm not out to convert people, just to present the facts as I see them. If anyone wants to claim that we are designed to eat cows/sheep/pigs, take a bite out of your leather couch and post the photos here, I'd be very interested to see the results.

Edited December 14, 2013 by Xenodimensional

[C_T]

as long as human has survived, they've had fire. and cooked food. it helps digestion. but yes, we should eat raw things as well as cooked, bits of everything, not alot of 1 (unless you have to, like eskimo's)

Edited December 14, 2013 by C_T

[Subaeruginosin]

That's not evidence, that's you basing broad statements on your limited individual experience of the world. If anything, that suggests you have a fast basal metabolic rate.

Well it's a hell of a lot more evidence than you provided. lol, telling people there uneducated and don't read enough doesn't even count as anecdotal evidence in my book.

Anyway, I probably do have a good metabolism. But doesn't change the fact that once i hit 25 it was a constant struggled to stay under 70kg and then I became vegetarian and even now at 30 I seem to be able to eat what ever I want and average 58kg and never ever go above 61kg. So as far as I'm concerned my theory stands true because it works for me, unless you have anything else other than personal insults to prove me wrong of course?

lol, I bet you won't be able to let me have the last word.

[teonanacatl]

In general be wary of scientists and doctors who write books aimed at the public. There is probably a reason why they are writing a book and not putting it into scientific papers, ie they are generally selling something- snake oil usually.

[teonanacatl]

You best bet is to eat a healthy balanced diet. Most people who switch to being vegetarian do a hopeless job- you can still be a vegetarian and unhealthy. My gf is a dietician and a lot of patients she sees with malnutrition are vegetarians- contrairywise most of the obese patients and diseased patients she sees are not.

My advice, eat things that make your body feel good, if you tend to avoid or dislike certain foods chances are you have a bit of a reaction to them and your body has noticed it. Personal dietary requirements are as varied as the people in this world.

Last thing, earlier in the thread someone said avoid nitrates/nitrites in meat. Unfortunately its never as simple as believing what other people say, here are the facts, analysis of nitrate and nitrite levels in food and beverages in Australia- the good stuff starts at appendix 3.

http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/additives/nitrate/documents/Survey%20of%20nitrates%20and%20nitrites%20Attach%201.pdf

For those to slack to read it here is some data:

Nitrate levels- range in mg/kg

Ham 20-90

Bacon 22-90

Beetroot (canned) 1643-2328

Salami 16-335

Lettuce 520-2898

Potato cooked 63-191

Pumpkin cooked 10-452

Spinach cooked 671-3663

The funny thing with people trying to be healthy is often there is 1-2 obvious reasons for their obesity/ unhealthy but most people refuse to change them. Like a person trying to loose weight by going on a diet when they dont exercise, or trying to eat healthy when they gorge on chocolate everyday. Its quite common for people to sacrifice healthy food in their diet so they can squeeze in their chocolate. Smoking is another one, it aint really going to matter what you eat if you're a moderate to heavy smoker.

[teonanacatl]

Also I doubt funding from the wheat association has anything to do with the outcome, more so the other way around. Researchers are always looking for funding and they contact people who are likely to fund them with the results they have.

[Sallubrious]

Yeah that was a drunken attempt at sarcasm, I probably should stay off the computer when I've been drinking.

Edited December 15, 2013 by Sally

[Subaeruginosin]

You best bet is to eat a healthy balanced diet. Most people who switch to being vegetarian do a hopeless job- you can still be a vegetarian and unhealthy. My gf is a dietician and a lot of patients she sees with malnutrition are vegetarians- contrairywise most of the obese patients and diseased patients she sees are not.

Just out curiosity, what exactly would it be that a vegetarian would be more likely to be deficient in than a non-vegetarian? Keeping in mind that there’s a huge difference between vegetarian and vegan. At the expense of coming across as rude or arrogant, that statement comes across to me as a little bit narrow minded, like observing a few hopeless people who smoke weed and then declaring that most cannabis smokers are lazy dole bludgers.

Yeah there is EPA & DHA omega 3, but a healthy body can easily convert plant omega 3 (ALA) into EPA & DHA. Not to mention that this is mostly irrelevant since your average westerner simply doesn't eat much fish (if any) anyway so would be expected to be just as deficient in omega 3 as any vegetarian.

Smoking is another one, it aint really going to matter what you eat if you're a moderate to heavy smoker.

Well I agree a person who smokes will never be the definition of good health (hence why I’m currently in the process of quitting a 17 year old habit), I think it’s a very short sighted statement to say that it doesn't matter what a smoker eats, especially in the short term. There’s non-smokers at my work who live off a diet of chocolates, doritos, soft drinks, meat pies and sausage rolls. I refuse to believe that they could be considered more healthy then me, who has a staple diet of eggs, salads, tofu, wheat, cheese, protein powder and takes multi vitamins, calcium, omega 3 and B complex vitamins everyday. btw, anyone who claims multi vitamins don’t work is an idiot (imho)! They do make a huge difference.

Edited December 15, 2013 by Subaeruginosin

[teonanacatl]

Re the deficiencies in vegetarians; iron is a big one, especially women. Calcium intake is very important for young women (risk of osteoporosis increases) and a lot are not getting enough if they dont do dairy, so much so that dieticians dont care if women have coco pops or muesli as just having that much milk everyday it outweighs the crap. Dont mis-interpret what Ive said though, Im saying that when some people switch to become vegetarians they do a shit job, they dont consider their actual dietary needs and where they are going to obtain them. One can live a completely sufficient and healthy life as a vegetarian and I know plenty who do, its just a lot more difficult. There is some bias in who walks into a hospital with dietary problems- ie healthy people dont normally show up, so yeah dont feel as though Im saying all vegetarians are sick.

Re smoking; I agree with you, you seem to live a healthy lifestyle so your body is probably better at fighting cancer then a smoker who didnt. One can be large and still be healthy, just as one can be skinny and unhealthy, just as one can smoke and run marathons, same as one can live off maccas and run in the olympics- there are just too many facets of health to try and quantify who is healthier just looking at them and limited other factors. The direction I meant with that comment was smoking is definitely one of the first things someone should drop if they wish to change their lifestyle and it would probably show the biggest reward.

[Sallubrious]

So you feel you need to take four different types of supplements to stay healthy on vegetarian diet Subaeraginosin?

I'm not saying that you shouldn't but it does seem to be an indication of the shortcomings of a vegetarian diet. I prefer to get vitamins from food sources and imo it's just easier and more efficient to do that with some meat in the diet.

The only supplements I take are vitamin C as our bodies can't manufacture it. I do a lot of very intense weight training and I found without vitamin C my recovery rate is woeful, my joints start to creak and ache and I succumb to tendonitis. When I take vitamin C those problems disappear. Vitamin C is used in the formation of collagen so I believe it works for me because I'm placing extra demands on my system with the weight training by breaking down muscle fibers and stressing the crap out of my tendons. If I wasn't weight training I probably wouldn't take it. It could be a placebo effect, but I've gone without vitamin C many times over the years and just forgotten about it until all those problems come back and remember that I'm not taking it.

I've never noticed any great benefits from vitamins other than vitamin C, except maybe a bit of pep up from vitamin B which I never get from food sources of vitamin B. I've given a few people kefir grains to culture their own milk and after drinking it for a while their clinically diagnosed vitamin B deficiencies have disappeared. I think food sources of vitamins are much more effective than supplements & like I said before some meat in the diet just simplifies that process.

Edited December 15, 2013 by Sally

[Subaeruginosin]

So you feel you need to take four different types of supplements to stay healthy on vegetarian diet Subaeraginosin?

No, I don’t think you ‘need’ to take any vitamins to supplement a vegetarian diet at all. Since as teo already pointed out, there’s very little in the way of vitamins in meat (except omega 3 from fish) that a healthy male can’t easily obtain somewhere else. Though, I do personally believe that ‘everyone’ should probably take multi-vitamins and other individual vitamins that your regular diet might sometimes lack, simply as a fail safe to ensuring you never become deficient in anything.

I will say I do think vegetarians make a mistake of not having enough protein in their diet though. I think a high protein diet is very important to general wellbeing and tofu & beans just don’t cut it imo. So I do think vegetarians should be taking advantage of all the whey protein powders available these days. Some people are so ignorant when it comes to healthy diets, they see you drinking a protein shake and make comments about how you must be trying to get big muscles, it’s like “no dip shit, protein powder can simply be used as a dietary supplement and doesn't automatically have to be a bodybuilding supplement, so I’m merely supplementing my diet with lots of lean protein without stuffing shit loads of cooked flesh and my throat, which is drenched with saturated & trans fats and god knows what hormones”.

People are just ignorant and stupid in general, like they'll watch someone scoop 4 table spoons of coffee into there cup and won't think twice, but if they see you take one 100mg caffeine pill they'll look at you like your a meth head or something.

[tipz]

Those protein powders are full of aspartame or similar artificial sweeteners. Nasty stuff. ( %95 of them anyway )

( and sub many vegetarians get everything they need from being vegetarian. It just takes education and commitment to do so. )

Edited December 16, 2013 by cacti jihadist

[Subaeruginosin]

^^^Yeah, Aspartame is meant to be one of the bad artificial sweeteners, if you believe the hype, that is. It's in diet coke and coke zero from memory. The protein powder I'm using at the moment has Acesulframe potassium and Sucralose, haven't done much research on Acesulframe, but Sucralose seems to be one of the better ones from what I've seen, well at least I've personally judged it to be the lesser evil to sugar. You can get whey protein without any artificial sweeteners, but I've found a totally bland diet just leads to over eating in the long run. All power to ya though if if can live off a completely tasteless diet, but I'll stick with the artificial sweeteners for now as long as they help keep me off the empty calories of sugar.

You may be right about needing to think a little about what to add to your diet when you don't eat meat, but likewise either way right? There's plenty of people out there who eat plenty of meat and still suffer from deficiencies. I might get a little too defensive about it, but that's simply because not eating meat just ain't the big deal a lot of people make it out to be. There's a lot of ignorance and propaganda out there against vegetarians that is equivalent to the ignorance and propaganda that most of you would have personally witnessed from people when it comes to psychedelics. I personally have never looked healthier or felt healthier since I made the change.

Anyway, when it comes to cheese, I think it probably would be healthier if you could eat as least as possible, but what can I say? I love cheese! It's like my favorite thing in the world just under blonde chicks and weed, lol.

[Sallubrious]

You can get pea protein powders quite cheap these days. I don't know how they taste as a drink but they would be a good way to add some protein to your diet if you were to add it to vegetarian recipes.

Falafels, batters, soups etc. I imagine it would blend in with a lot Indian dishes quite well too.