Diet and nutrition

[DazalenkoUBewty]

Ah, GMO's and Monsanto.

Climate change - most scientists say it's happening - believe in science people!
Vaccinations - most scientists say they're safe - believe in science people!
GMO's - most scientists say they're safe - IT'S A CONSPIRACY. DON'T BELIEVE THEM, THEY ARE PAID SHILLS!

Science has been around for a long time...

Has it always been right? Has it ever back flipped?

 

[DazalenkoUBewty]

Monsanto's fine, if u don't mind your food doused in herbicide. What harms/kills one living organism, harms/kills all living organisms, over time.

There's one thing you don't do, and that's mess with nature...

We'll look back in 20-30-40-50 years at some of the things we did in these times and just think W-T-F...just as we look back today at dodgy things from the past...

 

[showdownhero]

Ah, GMO's and Monsanto.

Climate change - most scientists say it's happening - believe in science people!
Vaccinations - most scientists say they're safe - believe in science people!
GMO's - most scientists say they're safe - IT'S A CONSPIRACY. DON'T BELIEVE THEM, THEY ARE PAID SHILLS!

Food industry is full of obfuscated, self funded, unreliable research.

Most scientists (and medical advisors) say we should eat less move more and grains/carbs are an essential part of a healthy diet, even for those battling type 2 diabetes. So excuse me for not having 100% faith in what "most scientists" have to say.

BTW I'm not against GMOs per se but to just advocate what "most scientists" say and you're gonna have a bad time.

 

[DazalenkoUBewty]

Food industry is full of obfuscated, self funded, unreliable research.

Most scientists (and medical advisors) say we should eat less move more and grains/carbs are an essential part of a healthy diet, even for those battling type 2 diabetes. So excuse me for not having 100% faith in what "most scientists" have to say.

Want to get rid of type 2 diabetes? Eat raw plant foods for a month-ish... Oh yeah, and all the fruit u can handle is included in that.

Eating less and moving more isn't a bad idea for most. Processed carbs..nah.

 

[showdownhero]

Want to get rid of type 2 diabetes? Eat raw plant foods for a month-ish... Oh yeah, and all the fruit u can handle is included in that.

Eating less and moving more isn't a bad idea for most. Processed carbs..nah.

Yes fruits are great for those with type 2 diabetes, your body can totally tell the difference between the sugar from fruit and the sugar from other sources.

There's a totally different metabolic pathway for raw plant food and non raw plant food. It's like magic.

 

[PoppedCorn]

Duely noted re protein
you should see qhat some of the blokes eat at work
**** me drunk

one guy one pie one coke and copious coffee every day
another guy in his 30s easily a litre of coke day every day

Another guy a different heinz tin of soup everyday

Terrible diets everyday for years

 

[DemonTim]

That is a lot, I'd top out at 3g per kg. But I keep it steady around 2.5kg per kg.

Yep, if you look at most trainers meal plans its around that. I'm on about 2g at the moment (slightly under)

 

[M Malice]

Duely noted re protein
you should see qhat some of the blokes eat at work
**** me drunk

one guy one pie one coke and copious coffee every day
another guy in his 30s easily a litre of coke day every day

Another guy a different heinz tin of soup everyday

Terrible diets everyday for years

i owned a pub in western queensland in the early 90s, there were a few regulars there who would put away a litre of coke before lunch.

there was one bloke we called 2bob he was a shearer and he said he didn't drink water which i found hard to believe, although i only ever saw him drink a dozen pots followed by a bucket load of rum and coke and then he would be in the next morning to start his day off with 3 or 4 cans of coke. i am sure he is dead now, good bloke though, not an arse hole on the piss just a funny bugger.

 

[Toump Ass]

i owned a pub in western queensland in the early 90s, there were a few regulars there who would put away a litre of coke before lunch.

there was one bloke we called 2bob he was a shearer and he said he didn't drink water which i found hard to believe, although i only ever saw him drink a dozen pots followed by a bucket load of rum and coke and then he would be in the next morning to start his day off with 3 or 4 cans of coke. i am sure he is dead now, good bloke though, not an arse hole on the piss just a funny bugger.

Yeah I used to be one of those campaigners.

Literally would drink nothing but coke, energy drinks, cafe latte and whatever booze you had in the fridge. I also did plenty of drugs and smashed shitloads of ciggies. No excercise except for the occasional root and 24 hours fistpumping at Revs. Would maybe have 500ml of water if a hangover was particularly bad but that was about as often as hailey's comet: every other time was Red Bull, a couple of darts and 5 packets of migoreng noodles.

All my friends were like: "Seriously. No water? That's not even possible". But it really is. I couldn't even figure out when you were supposed to have water: Coffee in the morning, red bull during the day. Coke a Cola at night. Then you'd sleep like shit and start the routine again.

But anyway, I'm here now, and I want to look buff and pull younger girls. I'm looking forward to being a solid and regular contributor around these parts.

Thanks everyone.

 

[Damon_3388]

Are you suggesting some sort of Soylent Green Solution?

It already exists.

 

[Bazzar]

Vegan Pete Siddle is struggling to get to 130ks late in the day on a Perth wicket? What!
Commentators are puzzled.

 

[M Malice]

 

[Bazzar]

Needs a good

Will add an extra 10ks to his lack of pace.

 

[WakeUpPies]

A good diet can't make an average athlete elite but a poor diet will make an elite athlete average.

 

[Bazzar]

His techniques fine, that's because he's elite athlete, but his speed and power has dropped massively since taking up the bananas and ditching the rib-eye

 

[DemonTim]

His techniques fine, that's because he's elite athlete, but his speed and power has dropped massively since taking up the bananas and ditching the rib-eye

To be fair in pretty sure his best series was when he was vegan. They mentioned his banana diet every wicket he took

 

[Bazzar]

To be fair in pretty sure his best series was when he was vegan. They mentioned his banana diet every wicket he took

His first full vegan series was an Ashes and yes it was his best, but that was probably due to giving up the heavy drinking and losing weight, but every one since he has gone backward.

 

[StiffArm]

His first full vegan series was an Ashes and yes it was his best, but that was probably due to giving up the heavy drinking and losing weight, but every one since he has gone backward.

Surely you have to realize what you are doing is unintellectual shit stirring?
There are all sorts of reasons a person may drop in form, you have **** all in the way of fact but head straight to an attempted confirmation of what you'd like to believe. "we NEED to eat meat, which is my excuse for participating in a cruel, world polluting activity"

It reminds me of around May this year when two stories dropped at the same time.
Climber dies on Everest, one of 3 to die that weekend but this one was different. She was vegan. Suddenly all the headlines were that her diet caused it (factually crap assertion, but don't let that stop anyone).
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...edy-but-her-diet-was-irrelevant-a7046191.html

At the same time a boy was left in the woods in Japan.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/y...andoned-parents-punishment-found-safe-n585041

Why weren't the headlines here "7 year old boy abandoned in woods by meat-eating parents as punishment found safe"? It would have been just as relevant to the story.

Some consistency please.

 

[StiffArm]

So your OK with rubbish from Campbell, McDougall, and pure BS like forks over knives [and China study..lol]

Oh, and do you have the years and numbers for Mitchel Johnson's "massive form drop" over the last couple of years?

First, your approach of rubbishing entire works because you can find a couple of inconsistencies is ridiculous. They aren't hatchet jobs, some arguments can be made about the relevance of some aspects of the studies, and some arguments can be made about numbers because they can change fairly dramatically depending on assumptions made.
Pointing out some areas of contention doesn't invalidate everything else in a body of work. For instance just because a sample size is too small doesn't mean that the results didn't happen.
You are taking the exact approach "lord" Monckton took, claiming climate change isn't happening because he could find 35 things in "an inconvenient truth" that he thought he could disprove.

I have no interest in digging for numbers and years for Mitchel's form drop. It happened, and it wouldn't matter if it hadn't, the point I'm making is that players lose form for all sorts of reasons, and it happens across all sports. Are you saying that diet should be questioned in all cases where bowlers lose speed?

 

[DemonTim]

First, your approach of rubbishing entire works because you can find a couple of inconsistencies is ridiculous. They aren't hatchet jobs, some arguments can be made about the relevance of some aspects of the studies, and some arguments can be made about numbers because they can change fairly dramatically depending on assumptions made.
Pointing out some areas of contention doesn't invalidate everything else in a body of work. For instance just because a sample size is too small doesn't mean that the results didn't happen.
You are taking the exact approach "lord" Monckton took, claiming climate change isn't happening because he could find 35 things in "an inconvenient truth" that he thought he could disprove.

I have no interest in digging for numbers and years for Mitchel's form drop. It happened, and it wouldn't matter if it hadn't, the point I'm making is that players lose form for all sorts of reasons, and it happens across all sports. Are you saying that diet should be questioned in all cases where bowlers lose speed?

Diet is one of the first things questioned when players start underperforming

Of course a small sample size doesn't mean the results didn't happen. It means that there are questions around the validity and applicability of results. What a stupid strawman.

 

[StiffArm]

I haven't agreed with bazzar here, but I don't think you have any clue about crickey based on this

If you're going to make a blanket statement at least give a modicum of evidence your argument. I played cricket for a dozen years, got to district level. Or maybe you're referring to Crikey, a fine online newspaper. You should subscribe to it, you might learn something.

Also stop peddling this "moral justification" crap. Frankly, most people do not morally justify food. Morals are different from person to person. I have no moral issue eating meat, just like none of us here morally justify why we use products that are produced overseas for minimal cost and payment to employees. What's important to your morality, has no bearing on anyone else in the world. It's completely subjective (and as I've said numerous times before, moral discussion has no place on this board. Take it to SRP)

Just because most people do something doesn't make it right, unless you want to give your blessings to suffrage, segregation and slavery.
It may not be a consideration for the majority, but if a harm causing practice is easily avoidable, why not?

I will stop bringing up morality when you guys stop giving arguments that are just flat out stupid like the one below.

If everyone on the planet stopped eating any animal products period, what would happen to all the farm animals? How do they contribute to the survival of the human race? We'd have to rely on plant foods which the animals will be after too. Eventually would we have to resort to hunting all the cows and chickens of the world to extinction? .... dun dun dun

95% of animal biomass worldwide is now humans or things domesticated by humans. Mass extinction is happening now and it's primarily caused by habitation destruction for animal agriculture. You can eat all the current animals, just stop breeding them.

Diet is one of the first things questioned when players start underperforming

Of course a small sample size doesn't mean the results didn't happen. It means that there are questions around the validity and applicability of results. What a stupid strawman.

Do you feel a compulsive need to quote everything I say but add nothing to the conversation. I get that you're still somewhat hurt by that one time I answered you without glowing affection, but sooner or later you should try to get over it.

 

[DemonTim]

If you're going to make a blanket statement at least give a modicum of evidence your argument. I played cricket for a dozen years, got to district level. Or maybe you're referring to Crikey, a fine online newspaper. You should subscribe to it, you might learn something.



Just because most people do something doesn't make it right, unless you want to give your blessings to suffrage, segregation and slavery.
It may not be a consideration for the majority, but if a harm causing practice is easily avoidable, why not?

I will stop bringing up morality when you guys stop giving arguments that are just flat out stupid like the one below.



95% of animal biomass worldwide is now humans or things domesticated by humans. Mass extinction is happening now and it's primarily caused by habitation destruction for animal agriculture. You can eat all the current animals, just stop breeding them.



Do you feel a compulsive need to quote everything I say but add nothing to the conversation. I get that you're still somewhat hurt by that one time I answered you without glowing affection, but sooner or later you should try to get over it.

Clearly an autocorrect. Could've just responded to the point. You're making blanket claims about players underperforming but showing nothing. So you can make claims and we just have to believe you?

How in any way was that the point? You're waffling on about moral justification for eating animals. No one here has to justify it, and no one seems to. You're the one who has moral issue with it, why do others have to stop based on your morals? Why is your morality more important than others? (I did like your hyperbole though).

Your last paragraph is clear you can't respond to points made to you. You asked a question about if a player underperforms do we question their diet (the implication was clear), I responded to confirm that's the case (casey and Melbourne fc definitely do, as do cricket fix). The second point was pointing out your rubbish strawman that anyone is claiming small sample size means the result didn't exist. That's clearly not what it means

 

[WakeUpPies]

Does anyone else read through these vegan posts while eating meat?

 

[StiffArm]

Clearly an autocorrect. Could've just responded to the point. You're making blanket claims about players underperforming but showing nothing. So you can make claims and we just have to believe you?

I apologize, I should think twice about potentially offending you lest you quote all my posts twice. I'm actually just repeating claims Siddle himself made in an interview, but the point that I made doesn't need referenced examples unless you're trying to claim that only vegan athletes lose speed.

How in any way was that the point? You're waffling on about moral justification for eating animals. No one here has to justify it, and no one seems to. You're the one who has moral issue with it, why do others have to stop based on your morals? Why is your morality more important than others? (I did like your hyperbole though).

I'm suggesting that morality and a wish to pass off meat consumption as natural/necessary/normal may be why some people are so quick to jump to anti-vegan conclusions. Do you see anyone getting this emotional against atkins diets? For all the stereotypes of whacky chanting vegans foisting their opinions on others if you actually read through this thread most of the extravagant claims and emotive language goes the other way.
As far as the attempt to turn this into a "me imposing my morality" thing, I haven't anywhere suggested that everyone goes vegan. All I've done is counter claims I consider to be false and discuss others, and present the arguments for a different lifestyle that is often vilified. I will say that I'm sorry if you're suffering hurt feelings because you think I'm telling you how to live. I clearly should be more empathetic with my choices.

Your last paragraph is clear you can't respond to points made to you. You asked a question about if a player underperforms do we question their diet (the implication was clear), I responded to confirm that's the case (casey and Melbourne fc definitely do, as do cricket fix). The second point was pointing out your rubbish strawman that anyone is claiming small sample size means the result didn't exist. That's clearly not what it means

I was referring to public, media questions.
All the second point showed was why having you quote everything I say creates problems. my "rubbish strawman" was referencing an earlier conversation I was having with Bazzar. As great as I'm sure you are, my presence in this thread isn't all about you.

 

[StiffArm]

Does anyone else read through these vegan posts while eating meat?

I try to keep my sex life and bigfooty seperate, but I'm sure your boyfriend appreciates.