Daily reminder that you are literally shortening your life by continuing to eat meat and animal products.
My family is long-lived despite terrible diet and exercise habits so I'd rather just eat lean meats and fish most of the time, enjoy a juicy steak on occasion, work out and play outside like a boss and die when my time comes.
I don't think a little longevity is worth it. Can't live forever anyway and any impact I have on earth will happen before that stuff matters.
BMI and body fat percentage are highly correlated with heart disease, diabetes and many cancer fatalities.
Meat comes with food overabundance, and obesity comes with food overabundance. But obesity does not come with meat.
The United States has the most fat people and therefore the unhealthiest out of all 1st world countries because of food abundance, government subsidy and promotion of calorie dense HFCS and soybean oil et al., and marketing. That's it.
>shortening your life
That's simply not true. I am in fact significantly lengthening my life by eating meat because if I had to eat rabbit food for the rest of my life I would kill myself within a month.
>still eating food and lowering your lifespan
>not doing the parenteral nutrition masterrace diet
Vegetables aren't always delicious either- why do you think people cook them with oil salt and spices?
People crave meat and plants, oils, salts, sugars, in a non-exclusive way, because all of these foods contain essential nutrients.
Meat, especially red meat contains an abundance of bioavailable micronutrients which have to be supplemented in vegan diets. It contains more bioavailable proteins and a better balance of fatty acids than most plant foods. Even grass fed red meats contain a sufficient amount of Omega-3 fatty acids to the point where supplementation is unnecessary.
People crave fat, salt, B12, micronutrients and protein, therefore they eat meat. People also crave carbohydrates and B-vitamins, therefore they eat their meat on a wheat bun. They crave vegetables with micronutrients, antioxidants and insoluble fibers which they can't get from meat and bread, therefore they put tomatoes, slaw, lettuce and onions on their burger.
>[British vegetarians] death rates are similar to those of comparable non-vegetarians, suggesting that much of this benefit may be attributed to non-dietary lifestyle factors such as a low prevalence of smoking and a generally high socio-economic status, or to aspects of the diet other than the avoidance of meat and fish.
>b-but muh heart disease!
Do you want to not die, or do you want to not die from heart disease? Further, meta-studies on vegetarianism are poisoned by the inclusion of Adventist studies, which don't factor for obesity because they believe obesity to be divine punishment for eating meat (not even joking).
Randomized-controlled studies cast serous doubt on a meaningful role of diet in the morbidity or mortality of heart disease, with weight and exercise appearing to be the salient factors, e.g.:
>CONCLUSIONS: Two-year weight loss diets can induce a significant regression of measurable carotid VWV. The effect is similar in low-fat, Mediterranean, or low-carbohydrate strategies and appears to be mediated mainly by the weight loss-induced decline in blood pressure
>meat is not delicious unless you put a shit ton of spices or sauces on it
found the homosexual
you think that's the only thing missing from your diet? I mean your meme-diet is one sided enough to make creatine have a nootropic effect on you. You are literally mentally handicapped because of nutritional deficiencies when vegan.
How is that last study supposed to support your claim? It shows that people who are overweight or obese (BMI ≥27) and that lose weight have some of their health markers improve. Not that people who are lean and exercise are immune to heart disease or that isocaloric diets of varying composition have no notable influence on heart disease risk. That's complete quackery.
dha (one of the two essential omega-3 fatty acids)
If diet DID not a notable influence on heart disease risk, then we should see this in RCT of fatties, but we don't.
We can't study heart disease in the lean and fit because the CVD morbidity is, for all intents an purposes, zero.
Holy shit stop wasting oxygen you retarded imbecile
You're pulling statistics out of your ass and it's obvious you have no formal education on this topic. People who are lean and fit die from atherosclerosis all the time. You can induce atherosclerosis in lean and fit animals. This is because deposition of atherogenic lipoproteins in the intima is the underlying cause. The complications of obesity and lack of exercise (insulin resistance, hypertension, impaired immune functioning, and so forth) can accelerate lesion development, but you cannot get lesions without supraphysiological amounts of lipoproteins.
>but you cannot get lesions without supraphysiological amounts of lipoproteins
Not only not true, but completely absurd. Specific fractions of lipoproteins, not TOTAL lipoproteins are associated with atherosclerosis, but presumptive causal agents of atherosclerosis, e.g. smoking, have too little effect on lipid-profile for lipoproteins to be the mechanism, or at least sole mechanism, responsible for the development of ASVD.
>presumptive causal agents of atherosclerosis, e.g. smoking, have too little effect on lipid-profile for lipoproteins to be the mechanism
smoking isn't a causal agent, it's a contibutory agent
>if the serum total cholesterol is 90 to 140 mg/dL, there is no evidence that cigarette smoking, systemic hypertension, diabetes mellitus, inactivity, or obesity produces atherosclerotic plaques. Hypercholesterolemia is the only direct atherosclerotic risk factor; the others are indirect. If, however, the total cholesterol level is >150 mg/dL and the LDL cholesterol is >100 mg/dL, the other risk factors clearly accelerate atherosclerosis.
>Not only not true, but completely absurd. Specific fractions of lipoproteins
Hence my use of the qualifier 'atherogenic' in 'atherogenic lipoproteins', dumbfuck.
>presumptive causal agents of atherosclerosis, e.g. smoking, have too little effect on lipid-profile for lipoproteins to be the mechanism, or at least sole mechanism, responsible for the development of ASVD
Lmfao. Let me see an experimental model where breathing smoke alone causes atherosclerosis. I'm waiting.
>non-peer reviewed garbage
His "cite" for this pants-on-head-retarded claim is Keys Seven Countries study, which does not come even close to proving such an absurdity.
Higher quality studies have long since absolved total lipoproteins as the causal agent of atherosclerosis