Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
-
panacea
- Posts: 989
- https://cutt.ly/meble-kuchenne-wroclaw
- Joined: Wed 23 Jun 2010 22:08
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
I didn't know there was a 100 grams of animal food restriction, that's news to me, but yes that's stupid if it exists
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
You keep dealing in extremes. People will change, when they start to get sick en masse. Also, I think most people would prefer a blue rare steak to fruit. Milk, sure, I'm all for it, as well as raw dairy, which also tastes good. Egg yolks beaten with fruit, also very tasty. Sashimi. Many ways to make keto taste good to the masses. Organs are not even obligatory.panacea wrote: ↑Thu 18 Apr 2019 06:11 So what hope is there that people will all go back to eating raw animal food? Very little in my opinion, unless it tastes good - like milk and fruits do. So, practically and rationally, the best hope for humanity is to get them eating raw milk and fruits, since it's actually viable for their palates.
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
And "healthly" cooked meat is still better than fruit, many times, because it has tons more bioavailable nutrition. According to Weston A Price studies, plant protein is only 10% absorbable. The aminoacid quality is bad. Same for fats, very low quality and bioavailability. Same for micronutrients. Fruit is just very incomplete food for humans. If the meat/eggs/fish is cooked rare (which many recipes call for) it will still retain a lot of the good stuff. And even a well-done meat + raw dairy diet will be much healthier (what we had 50, 100 years ago).
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
People have been sick en masse for decades now, 1 in 3 young couples in modern countries are infertile or dealing with signs of infertility (same as with pottengers cat study), in a few more generations they will have to change or face civilization failure as they'll be unable to remain productive enough to care for the ever growing sick and dying population.
In my opinion, raw never-frozen, room temperature steak with milk tastes just as good as any rare steak. I still don't know why people would cook it at all. If they want the warmth just put it under a heat lamp right before eating or something. Egg yolks with fruit sounds like a gross combo but I'll take your word for it. None of that sounds keto to me though, especially with milk. I don't see the advantage to being keto either, as that would mean no or very very little milk and fruit which would be the highlights of the diet for most people in terms of taste.
While I would agree with you that very rare cooked meat is still better than fruit, because most of the meat isn't actually cooked! If you 'thoroughly cook' meat, then it might have far better protein and lots more good fat, but it's also going to clog your gut/putrefy and be a high tax to the body whereas a ripe fruit eaten alone may not be, for a healthy person. Also, let's be real, nobody is going to eat a bland cooked meat patty with nothing else regularly and be a happy person.. they're going to put some shit on there that's probably worse than fruit.
In my opinion, raw never-frozen, room temperature steak with milk tastes just as good as any rare steak. I still don't know why people would cook it at all. If they want the warmth just put it under a heat lamp right before eating or something. Egg yolks with fruit sounds like a gross combo but I'll take your word for it. None of that sounds keto to me though, especially with milk. I don't see the advantage to being keto either, as that would mean no or very very little milk and fruit which would be the highlights of the diet for most people in terms of taste.
While I would agree with you that very rare cooked meat is still better than fruit, because most of the meat isn't actually cooked! If you 'thoroughly cook' meat, then it might have far better protein and lots more good fat, but it's also going to clog your gut/putrefy and be a high tax to the body whereas a ripe fruit eaten alone may not be, for a healthy person. Also, let's be real, nobody is going to eat a bland cooked meat patty with nothing else regularly and be a happy person.. they're going to put some shit on there that's probably worse than fruit.
Last edited by panacea on Thu 18 Apr 2019 06:40, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
I'm not in any way an advocate of cooked meat (except for parasite-prone animals, but then again we should just avoid those altogether).
Throughly cooked meat is certainly inflammatory (not excessively if you don't deep fry or pan fry or bake with lots of fat), and the fat, proteins and micros become much less utilizable/absorbable. But that kind of inflammation is preferable to fruit-based malnutrition or carb overload (or even anti-nutrient overload, compared to vegetables). That's why people are even healing cancer and auto-immune diseases on cooked carnivore diets.
Throughly cooked meat is certainly inflammatory (not excessively if you don't deep fry or pan fry or bake with lots of fat), and the fat, proteins and micros become much less utilizable/absorbable. But that kind of inflammation is preferable to fruit-based malnutrition or carb overload (or even anti-nutrient overload, compared to vegetables). That's why people are even healing cancer and auto-immune diseases on cooked carnivore diets.
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
I get that we would probably be malnourished if we tried to live on bananas, but if you juice lots of fruits like in Wai, you're getting plenty of nutrients in combination with some animal food, and most importantly it's not going to wreak havoc on your digestive system like a cooked diet would. The high sugar is definitively a problem for diabetics/prediabetics, but this isn't the fruits fault. Not sure what you mean by carb-overload. Also, do you really think anti-nutrients in fruit is a problem? I mean, get real, with all of the bad stuff in processed/cooked foods in stores, the anti-nutrients in fruit are angels. Also there's research to suggest small amounts of these antinutrients may even be beneficial to the body.
People have also healed from lots of things like cancer reportedly on all-grape diets for a time, the body can do miraculous things when you eliminate a lot of other factors weighing it down, doesn't really mean that the diet you're doing at the time is sustainable long term, even fasting can have good effects and it's very destructive to a body.
People have also healed from lots of things like cancer reportedly on all-grape diets for a time, the body can do miraculous things when you eliminate a lot of other factors weighing it down, doesn't really mean that the diet you're doing at the time is sustainable long term, even fasting can have good effects and it's very destructive to a body.
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
No, fruits not only lack several nutrients, the bioavailability is quite low. The quality and bioav. of proteins and fats is also ridiculously low. The absence of cholesterol and saturated fat. Etc etc.
The high sugar is a problem for everyone because we just haven't evolved eating this way. It's certainly less bad than eating sweets or grains because of the lower glycemic index, but it can still give you problems. Maybe it will never give you problems to you specifically, maybe you'll be lucky or your biochemistry can somehow handle it, but why risk it? What's the advantage of doing an unnatural diet that has absolutely no advantage over our natural diet? Just plain irrational.
I don't think anti-nutrients in fruit are problem, I'd just avoid nightshades. And yes, they can even be beneficial, acting as cleansing substances. That's why I eat fruit, mostly low carb, mostly cucumbers.
If people have healed cancer on all grape diet? Sure, I don't doubt it. It's just that, from what I know, this is the diet that's likely to give you the best chance, first and foremost for being our natural diet, so that's what I'll apply, even as prevention. (And it can't be unsustainable cause it's simply our natural diet).
The high sugar is a problem for everyone because we just haven't evolved eating this way. It's certainly less bad than eating sweets or grains because of the lower glycemic index, but it can still give you problems. Maybe it will never give you problems to you specifically, maybe you'll be lucky or your biochemistry can somehow handle it, but why risk it? What's the advantage of doing an unnatural diet that has absolutely no advantage over our natural diet? Just plain irrational.
I don't think anti-nutrients in fruit are problem, I'd just avoid nightshades. And yes, they can even be beneficial, acting as cleansing substances. That's why I eat fruit, mostly low carb, mostly cucumbers.
If people have healed cancer on all grape diet? Sure, I don't doubt it. It's just that, from what I know, this is the diet that's likely to give you the best chance, first and foremost for being our natural diet, so that's what I'll apply, even as prevention. (And it can't be unsustainable cause it's simply our natural diet).
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
That is an Acne Sample Diet rule. For those susceptible to acne. Once they know their protein tolerance, it is advised to experiment with eating more protein.
That is not a Wai Diet rule, at all.
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
Do you know what cancer is?
Human cells gone astray.
Of course they are fueled by nutrients.
Carbs are a main source of energy.
Of course they are a main source of energy for cancer cells also.
Carbs taken when they cannot be stored as carbs, yes.There's evidence that carbs fuel insulin resistance.
You know why?
Because insulin is tasked with the job of storing carbs and protein.
So, of course the best way to derail that system is by overfeeding that system with protein or sugars on the wrong moment.
We do know.When we don't know, we take the safer route.
We do know what compounds are bad for you.
Sugars are nutrients. They are nutrients, not bad compounds.
There is an extensive list of compounds with toxic properties.
Sugars are not on that list.
There was a time that fat was listed as bad. Then it was cholesterol. Now its sugar.
But when in balance, nutrients are good for you.
Now ask yourself, what compounds are bad for you?
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
RRM,
Several doctors and researchers agree that carbs are SPECIALLY fueling for cancer, more than fats and proteins, which are also energy sources. I'd speculate that modern humans are full of cancer cells (even prior to a cancer diagnosis) due to the innumerable mutagenic factors in the modern environment, so I'd strongly advocate a low-carb diet.
I understand that you see no problems with carbs, but if you also consider fats and protein totally fine, why necessarily advocate a carb diet, specially when, despite your personal opinion, the current evidence (as well as common sense observation) all points on carbs being the least safe macronutrient for humans? And one which played a quite small role in our evolution - would you also deny that humans haven't evolved like apes, eating 90% fruit 10% insects? That we've actually evolved eating 80/90%+ animals, including in the tropics, but definitely even more so in the rest of the world?
And perhaps even more importantly (I'll ask you once again): what's the advantage of fruit over meat that makes you advocate a restriction on meat on such a low ammount as 100 grams a day?
Several doctors and researchers agree that carbs are SPECIALLY fueling for cancer, more than fats and proteins, which are also energy sources. I'd speculate that modern humans are full of cancer cells (even prior to a cancer diagnosis) due to the innumerable mutagenic factors in the modern environment, so I'd strongly advocate a low-carb diet.
I understand that you see no problems with carbs, but if you also consider fats and protein totally fine, why necessarily advocate a carb diet, specially when, despite your personal opinion, the current evidence (as well as common sense observation) all points on carbs being the least safe macronutrient for humans? And one which played a quite small role in our evolution - would you also deny that humans haven't evolved like apes, eating 90% fruit 10% insects? That we've actually evolved eating 80/90%+ animals, including in the tropics, but definitely even more so in the rest of the world?
And perhaps even more importantly (I'll ask you once again): what's the advantage of fruit over meat that makes you advocate a restriction on meat on such a low ammount as 100 grams a day?
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
Yes, carbs are specially fueling ALL cells, but not cancer cells specifically.
Sugars are fast energy, for fast muscle contractions and brain activity.
You cannot starve cancer cells by taking no carbs. Simply impossible. Your body will never allow a sub-optimal blood-sugar level. So, even if you eat fats and protein ONLY, your cells can still get all the glucose they need, from fats and protein.
Your view is too simplistic.I'd speculate that modern humans are full of cancer cells (even prior to a cancer diagnosis) due to the innumerable mutagenic factors in the modern environment, so I'd strongly advocate a low-carb diet.
A low carb diet will not prevent cancer. Cancer cells are cancer cells because they outcompete normal cells, meaning that they are more prone to survival and growth than normal cells. Low carb does not selectively target cancer cells.
To prevent cancer, you should drastically lower the intake of mutagens. Your cooked foods are high in mutagens.
This is what they used to say about fats.the current evidence (as well as common sense observation) all points on carbs being the least safe macronutrient for humans?
Then it was cholesterol.
Now it is carbs.
They are nutrients. Perfectly healthy nutrients.
Nutrients are not unsafe. Toxins are unsafe. Wouldn't you agree?
100 grams a day is a Acne Sample Diet rule.what's the advantage of fruit over meat that makes you advocate a restriction on meat on such a low ammount as 100 grams a day?
It is not a Wai Diet rule.
Do you understand the difference?
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
What's the advantage of carbs that makes you advocate a carb-based diet?
What's the advantage of fruit over animal foods that makes you advocate a fruit-based diet?
Why not just tell people instead "humans' natural foods are fruits and raw animal foods" - and also stress that we've evolved eating much more meat than fruits, so, I don't know, maybe it would be safer to advocate a meat-based diet instead, or at least a 50/50 diet? You still haven't told me what's the advantage of fruits, because you definitely advocate a heavily fruit-based diet even the if the 100 gram restriction is only for the Acne Sample Diet (and you definitely share the opinion that we can be healthy on only 100 grams a day indefinitely).
What's the advantage of fruit over animal foods that makes you advocate a fruit-based diet?
Why not just tell people instead "humans' natural foods are fruits and raw animal foods" - and also stress that we've evolved eating much more meat than fruits, so, I don't know, maybe it would be safer to advocate a meat-based diet instead, or at least a 50/50 diet? You still haven't told me what's the advantage of fruits, because you definitely advocate a heavily fruit-based diet even the if the 100 gram restriction is only for the Acne Sample Diet (and you definitely share the opinion that we can be healthy on only 100 grams a day indefinitely).
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
We have 2 types of energy at our disposal: fast (sugars) and slow (fats) energy, which are perfectly complementary.
When you sleep, 90% of your energy comes from fat. When you are highly active, sugars are your main source of energy.
Sugars give you power. Fats give you endurance.
Fruits and animal food are perfectly complementary. For the most balanced intake of nutrients you need both.What's the advantage of fruit over animal foods that makes you advocate a fruit-based diet?
Both can perfectly be consumed raw.
If that was true, we would, like most animals, still be able to produce vitamin C endogenously.we've evolved eating much more meat than fruits,
But like other fruit eaters we cannot.
Safer?maybe it would be safer to advocate a meat-based diet instead
Fruits are the most safe foods for us on this planet!
Definitely.you definitely share the opinion that we can be healthy on only 100 grams a day indefinitely).
Vegans can even survive on solely plant foods for many, many years.
Adding a bit of animal foods immediately eliminates any nutrient deficiences.
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
A good example of people stuck in the notion that health is about getting lots of nutrients.mario91 wrote: ↑Thu 18 Apr 2019 06:25 And "healthly" cooked meat is still better than fruit, many times, because it has tons more bioavailable nutrition. According to Weston A Price studies, plant protein is only 10% absorbable. The aminoacid quality is bad. Same for fats, very low quality and bioavailability. Same for micronutrients. Fruit is just very incomplete food for humans.
The truth is that vitamin / mineral / protein deficiencies are very rare in Western societies nowadays, and yet diseases are rampant.
Humans, like other animals, can eat lots of low quality foods and still survive, and even thrive.
Why?
Because in nature, there is not always sufficient food available. In nature food is often scarse and sometimes abundant. In nature, we often eat whatever poorly digestable 'food' we can lay or hands / claws on.
This is reflected in micro-nutrient absorption rates; they may differ ten-fold; low in times of abundance and high when food is scarse.
In nature, the most important nutrients are energy: fats, sugars and protein. Except for cholesterol, virtually all other nutrients serve processing and utilising that energy.
So, when sufficient food is available every single day, there is no way you will lack nutrients.
Health in Western societies is not about getting enough nutrients, but about the extend of exposure to toxins and mutagens.
Re: Wai should be high in animal foods and low in fruit/carbs
I'm not gonna dispute most of what you said because science is not conclusive on these issues yet, so i guess we're just gonna have to agree to disagree.
Yet, you still haven't answered what's the advantage of fruit over animal foods, which makes you advocate a heavily fruit-based diet. If both fruits and animal foods are good, why not at least advocate 50/50? Also, if you recognize that animal foods are much more nutritious and complete, why promote a diet where they're in the minority? Just because we can survive with little, we should choose the least nutritious foods?
Vegans can definitely survive for many years, but no more than survive. The vegan drop out rate is staggering, as well as the health issues and the zombie-looking rates. And frutarians are usually the ones who fail sooner (just speaking of experience).
Yet, you still haven't answered what's the advantage of fruit over animal foods, which makes you advocate a heavily fruit-based diet. If both fruits and animal foods are good, why not at least advocate 50/50? Also, if you recognize that animal foods are much more nutritious and complete, why promote a diet where they're in the minority? Just because we can survive with little, we should choose the least nutritious foods?
Vegans can definitely survive for many years, but no more than survive. The vegan drop out rate is staggering, as well as the health issues and the zombie-looking rates. And frutarians are usually the ones who fail sooner (just speaking of experience).