When will you cucks learn that the only way to make gains, and lead a healthy life is through a vegan plant based diet? It literally extends your life by 10%
Especially if you want pic related as your goal body
>plant based diet
Every diet should include plenty of fruits, veggies, legumes, etc, adding in a few 100 grams of chicken breast a day isn't going to detract from the health benefits.
Gee OP it only took you 15 minutes to post that incomplete description. Most people can Google or use Wikipedia much faster than that, is your reading comprehension poor? What grade level are you reading at? 5th? 4th? Do your parents know you're underage b& on 4chan? ISN'T THIS A SCHOOL NIGHT?
OP if you're so smart and vegan yourself then why aren't you telling us about the spiritual belief system that is at the very core of veganism? You must not be a real vegan if you don't know about that, and real vegans are more than happy to talk about that aspect of veganism, so you must not be vegan.
then why is the vegan posterboy struggling when pulling lmao2plaet?
no citation in the OP for the 10% increase either
in any case, the typical vegan diet (WFPB diet) is healthier than the typical omnivorous diet (McDonalds every day), which is most likely the cause of higher life expectancy for vegans. This is commonly referred to as the "Healthy User Bias," ie the average vegan tries harder to be healthy than the average omnivore. An equally health conscious vegan and omnivore can be expected to live for similar lengths of time. Here's a citation http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8842068?report=abstract
Sorry, I linked the abstract. Here's the full text http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2352199/
There are some other studies on similar topics but they are mostly behind paywalls, sorry.
That's quite a bit of nutritional variety you cut out by dropping two major food groups. Of course you could nigger-rig it and come up with minimal deficiencies I'm sure but it's not really a superior diet if you have to play Frankenstein with it. Vegan culture has this weird hippie vibe to it too and no one really likes a hippie except for other hippies. Also the special diet thing is antisocial as hell if you ever step foot outside the commune. Also don't hippies frown on masculine power? Sounds like a conflict of interests to me.
In short, fuck that.
I think pescetarian is the worst. I know it's not meant to be an "ethical" choice like vegetarianism and vegan is, however I have met people who think they are ethically superior to omnivores because they don't eat meat instead of fish.
In reality they are hypocritical because they think animal lives matter enough to not kill them for meat but still eat some types, as well as still contributing to their shitty lives by consuming dairy and eggs etc.
I personally think we should subjugate any animal we want to. We didn't get to the top of the food chain of the whole world by caring about other animals feelings. Most animals extremely retarded by human standards anyway.
GTFO FUCKING GREEN NIGGER
FUCKING VEGAN DRAINS NOT WELCOME HERE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>Diet was assessed by a short questionnaire which asked about vegetarianism and intake of a few high fibre foods.
>We followed the cohort for a mean of 17 years. The long follow up has the advantages of yielding a large number of deaths and of ensuring that dietary habits were recorded, on average, long before the onset of symptoms of the diseases studied. The disadvantage is that dietary habits will have changed during the follow up. The validation study suggested that subjects' diets did change during the first few years of follow up in respect to vegetarian diet
>Changes in dietary habits would be expected to result in underestimation of any associations found.
>Another limitation is that the questionnaire was short and did not include several important food groups (for example, dairy products, fish, alcoholic drinks), did not allow us to estimate energy intake, and did not include other factors known to be associated with health (exercise, socioeconomic status, past smoking habits). We were therefore unable to explore whether the significant associations observed were partly due to confounding by other dietary or non-dietary variables.
Not a very good study, friend. The vegetarians being studied were only trying out vegetarianism at the start of the study and soon after changed back to a meat diet, so it was essentially omnivores compared to omnivores. Their questionnaire didn't even include dairy products, fish, or alcohol, and they didn't record levels of physical activity, energy intake, socioeconomic status, or history of smoking.
Here's another study on vegetarians vs. health-conscious omnivores of similar socioeconomic status.
And just look what shoes this fag is wearing.
Shit, I got lmao2pl8 deadlift on my first 6 weeks. No wonder he looks so bad, his genetics are really shitty.
Unrelated, but I'm wondering how much time is left before he becomes a supreme gentleman.
Piscitarian is the healthiest diet, tho. Lots of healthy fats, little to no unhealthy fats, lots of fiber and extremely high quality protein. Anyone who gets a heart attack on a pscitarian diet is someone who is TRYING to get a heart attack, otherwise I don't see how it would be possible.
Ethically is stupid, I agree.
How could you not lose associations when you're studying peoples' diets based on a short questionnaire, and their diets change before the follow-up? The thing they were studying wasn't there by the time they collected data
Yeah, they should have been eating more like vegetarians. Still, the meat eating group had half the mortality rate of the rest of the population.
Friendly reminder that we're can't sustain 7 billion people on a meat based diet. We're running out of water, even places like the eastern US are running a water deficit. Livestock is one of the largest consumers of water, and beef especially is terrible when it comes to water consumption.
The eastern US will look like California in 50 years if we're don't seriously cut back on meat, especially beef and pork.
There is no reason why we should expect bad data to increase associations versus decreasing them. To assume that associations are higher is bad science.
An extreme example. 100% of the vegetarians became meat eaters 1 day after initial survey, and 100% of meat eaters became vegetarians 1 day after the survey.
Any association would rightfully be decreased so far that it is the exact opposite.
Now this is extreme, but the study did say that "vegetarian diets changed within years of initial survey" As such any vegetarian benefits are most likely overstated, not understated.
I'm sure you or others could argue points why the view presented by me is incorrect, but that is the point. Conjecture is very week, and should be avoided. The only way to know is to followup with a more indepth study.
>running out of water
Metered water costs about 4/10ths of a cent.
Modern desalination plants can produce a gallon of fresh water for about 2/10ths of a cent, As such, with improvements in our infrastructure, we could replace all water usage for about a 50% increase in prices.
While 50% seems high, it should be remembered that when Gasoline tripled in price, it's effects on the economy were absorbed.
As the authors of the paper acknowledge, the change in dietary habits would make it very hard to find associations with disease and mortality. Because if the thing they're studying ceases to exist during the course of the study... then how could an association be made? They tried to study vegetarian diets in comparison to omnivorous diets, but the vegetarian group ceased to be a group of vegetarians. If a vegetarian diet is indeed healthier, then a study where the vegetarians were actually meat eaters couldn't possibly show that. You wouldn't expect to find meaningful differences.
>vegetarians had a .98 mortality ratio. (.88-1.10 95% confidence)
What meaningful difference?
>When adjusted for smoking habits, vegetarians had a 1.04 mortality ratio (.93-1.16)
Still not meaningful, but it is more likely to be true than the none adjusted figure.
So, why didn't the paper report that vegetarians are more likely to die? Bias. Why didn't the paper report that there is no meaningful difference? Bias. Why does the paper report studying "Vegetarians and other health conscious individuals?" Thereby admitting a belief that vegetarians eat healthier? BIAS.
This is a shit study. By shit authors.
I don't know what you're responding to. I said you WOULDN'T find meaningul differences, you WOULDN'T find associations, as the authors of the paper agreed. And they didn't. Because they weren't able to compare different diets, because peoples' diets changed over those 17 years. I agree that it's a pretty shit study, but I it was posted by a guy who was using it to argue that vegetarian diets aren't healthier than omnivorous diets. When we read the study, we learned that it didn't compare vegetarian diets with omnivorous diets at all.
Another study that did compare vegetarian diets to omnivorous diets was posted >>35601783
That's in regards to everything being studied. Fruit consumption, whole grain bread consumption, nut consumption etc. All things normally associated with improved health (which to be fair would also be true for vegetarian diets), the effects of which may be underestimated if the people being studied changed their eating habits during the course of the study. There's not really anything to complain about there.
Stopping doing something that reduces you life expectancy is not the same as extending you life expectancy
10% is a small difference too. Living till 81 instead of 90 is good enough for me
The study was trying to determine that, but due to internal circumstances, wasn't able to provide reliable data. If the authors of it were extremely biased in favor of vegetarianism, it doesn't make the slightest difference in what we're talking about. You're just picking a fight with the way some guys worded a study 30 years ago.
I'll be back if this thread's still up tonight
>tfw I eat better than the vegans in this paper
>tfw my cholesterol numbers are lower than the vegans in this paper
Albeit my dietary cholesterol is slightly higher than the meat eaters
>Yeah, they should have been eating more like vegetarians.
This and what this anon said: >>35596964
The USDA should just recommend people up their fiber intake to at minimum 60 grams from food, if anyone actually followed it, it would probably solve the majority of food related diseases; since by default your fruit and veggie intake would have to increase as well as displacing a lot of shit foods in the process.
Can't say I buy complete elimination of meat confers any significant health benefits on top of the above.
Becoming a vegetarian does not extend your life expectancy. This is a gallery statement that makes no sense if you think about it.
If you are on your deathbed and become a vegetarian do you live for an extra 10% because you are a vegetarian now?
No what you have done is stopped shortening your life expectancy by 10% you die at the same time you would have died
I'm a vegan but I acknowledge that you can be just as healthy as a non vegan.
I am a vegan for ethical reasons only. I am cutting right now and sometimes wish I could forget my beef with the meat industry and just eat some chicken. Hitting 130ish grams of protein while only eating 1900 kcal is pretty difficult on a vegan diet, especially when you take bioavailabity into account. I would rather not have to consume a shake every day but it is what it is.
My natural (maximum, vege healthy) life span is 90
I eat meat so I can expect my life span to DECREASE by 10% therefore 81
Not that that's true lel
Eating vege diet doesnt increase your life span, it just maximises your chance of living your full lifespan
IMO people should be vegan/vegeterian for at least health related reasons (I am an ethical vegan tho). People believe to be healthy with the recommended level of cholesterol for example in a society in which it is normal to have a heart attack or be "struck" by disease.
Btw you dont have to be very compassionate and love animals to be vegan.
You only need to understand that there is suffering beyond yourself and that you vote with your coin. Everybody would agree with veganism but most just dont understand it or lack interest. If you dont care about the enviroment, the animals or your own health, what do you even care about?
Veganism is normal, eating the remains or byproducts of sentient beings is not.
People need to re-evaluate their perspective on this.
Must be complicated bro,what I do is just Cherry-pick my info and lie to myself, this way I don't feel much towards animals
To shape reality in what you want is easy, look at furries
go back to tumblr, pls
we've already established that the differences in health between health concious vegans and meat-eaters is not that great
stopping the eating meat isn't the answer. REDUCING the amount of meat some people (amerifats) eat is the answer
You have a maximum life that you can live. It is a finite number and can never be extended. You have to live the perfect healthy life to live to that age.
Everything else you do takes away from this age
I browse tumblr to follow a few people, so what? Stop being so close minded.
I didnt say you there are overwhelming health benefits. Especially when you are young you wont feel a huge difference.
But what is wrong with just going vegan even if it wont give you magic powers? You cant do anything wrong by at least trying it.
I know it seems like animal products are delicious and convenient but when you go vegan and learn to cook properly you will see how unnecessary animal products are.
What does his diet habe to do with his physique not being impressive in your opinion? Do you actually think that animal products have some secret ingredient that you cant find in plants or some shit?
no it just shows that even though he claims to be an expert on the vegan diet he is shit at it. If his diet was good he would have a good physique and he makes videos telling people they'll give themselves cancer if they don't become vegan.
>meat stops being delicious
not how it works though, is it. I like meat, and I like vegetarian dishes. I eat everything, and have a more or less balanced diet, I enjoy the variety.
vegan diets lack certain amino acids, not to mention some key vitamins from meats and healthy fats in fish
why the fuck would I choose an unbalanced diet over a balanced one?