watermelon = Viagra?

[Vedic]

Here is some more reading for you hippies


Cordain L. Implications of Plio-Pleistocene Hominin Diets for Modern Humans. In: Early Hominin Diets: The Known, the Unknown, and the Unknowable. Ungar, P (Ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006, pp 363-83

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles/2006_Oxford.pdf

Cordain L. Saturated fat consumption in ancestral human diets: implications for contemporary intakes. In: Phytochemicals, Nutrient-Gene Interactions, Meskin MS, Bidlack WR, Randolph RK (Eds.), CRC Press (Taylor & Francis Group), 2006, pp. 115-126.

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles...er 2006a.pdf

Abuissa H, O’Keefe JH, Cordain, L. Realigning our 21st century diet and lifestyle with our hunter-gatherer genetic identity. Directions Psych 2005;25: SR1-SR10.

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles...ych 2005.pdf

Loren Cordain, S. Boyd Eaton, Anthony Sebastian, Neil Mann, Staffan Lindeberg, Bruce A. Watkins, James H. O’Keefe, Janette Brand Miller. Origins and evolution of the western diet: Health implications for the 21st century. Am J Clin Nutr 2005;81:341-54.

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles...er Final.pdf

O'Keefe JH Jr, Cordain L. Cardiovascular disease resulting from a diet and lifestyle at odds with our Paleolithic genome: how to become a 21st-century hunter-gatherer. Mayo Clin Proc 2004 Jan;79(1):101-8.

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles...rer Mayo.pdf

Lindeberg S, Cordain L, and Eaton SB. Biological and clinical potential of a Paleolithic diet. J Nutri Environ Med 2003; 13(3):149-160.

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles...Med 2003.pdf

Cordain L, Eaton SB, Brand Miller J, Mann N, Hill K. The paradoxical nature of hunter-gatherer diets: Meat based, yet non-atherogenic. Eur J Clin Nutr 2002; 56 (suppl 1):S42-S52.

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles...ox Final.pdf

Cordain L. The nutritional characteristics of a contemporary diet based upon Paleolithic food groups. J Am Nutraceut Assoc 2002; 5:15-24.

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles/JANA final.pdf

Cordain, L., Brand Miller, J., Eaton, S.B. & Mann, N. (2000). Macronutrient estimations in hunter-gatherer diets (letter). Am J Clin Nutr 2000; 72:1589-90.

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles...20Rebuttal.pdf

Cordain, L., Gotshall, R.W. and Eaton, S.B. Physical activity, energy expenditure and fitness: an evolutionary perspective. International Journal of Sports Medicine 1998; 19:328-335.

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles... Article.pdf

Eaton, S.B., Cordain, L. Old genes, new fuels: Nutritional changes since agriculture. World Rev Nutr Diet 1997; 81:26-37.

http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles...in paper.pdf

 

[Cory_Pilfold]

Imagine this scenario: your 12 month old baby is fussing because it is past his feeding time. You warm up his bottle of regular whole milk. No more infant formula. He looks healthy. You are feeding him well and you feel proud!

Wait a minute! There is something wrong with this picture.

It is the cow’s milk—the milk we all consume on a daily basis—1%, 2%, homogenized milk. White and seemingly so good for you!

Not so, says Dr. T. Colin Campbell Ph.D, Professor Emeritus of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University who has authored more than 350 research papers. He is also Winner of the 1998 American Institute of Cancer Research Award, the 2004 Burton Kallman Scientific Award by the Natural Nutrition Food Association.

In "The China Study," (Benbella Books, 2005), he presents the findings of a 45 year study and a 20-year partnership of Cornell University, Oxford University and the Chinese Academy of Preventive Medicine. And what is startling about the conclusions of his study is that cow’s milk (87% of which is made of the protein casein) actually encourages the growth of cancer cells in rats and humans. The China Study shows unequivocally that all meat is suspect: "nutrients from animal-based foods increased tumor development" while "nutrients from plant-based foods decreased tumor development."


OH AND BY THE WAY, I'LL BET YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT DR CAMPBELL IS ON A PLANT BASED DIET HIMSELF?

Imagine that, Somebody who you say claims that meat and milk is a requirement is on a plant based diet himsself..well this just debunks almost everything you've said. Sorry but you lose, My studies are based off REAL medicine and REAL science, and what you're trying to prove is based off bullshit mostly. DR campbell is a very intelligent man, he knows what hes talking about..he was smart enough to realize that his own studies were incorrect in many ways, Or at least the ones claiming that meat and milk were a requirement / healthy / etc.


What initiated Dr. Campbell’s study was not an attempt to justify vegetarianism. In fact, Dr. Campbell grew up as a farm boy in northern Virginia. For most of his life, he ate the typical North American diet—high in animal proteins, meat, eggs, whole milk, butter. But evidence from his own research pointed such an accusing finger at animal protein that he and his family adopted the plant-based diet fifteen years ago.

 

[Cory_Pilfold]

* The children who developed liver cancer from the nuts came from the best-fed (most affluent) families.
* These children consumed more protein than anyone else in the country (high quality animal protein).
* In studies on rats exposed to aflatoxin, only the animals fed 20% protein developed the cancer while those fed 5% got none.
* Reversing the diet of rats that developed cancer (from 20% to 5% protein) caused a reduction in tumor development; in rats (initially fed 5% protein), whose dietary protein was increased to 20%, there was an increase in tumor development.
* The dietary protein used in these experiments was animal protein

 

[Vedic]

For the last time. Did you read where his whole theory was debunked? Fuck Cory, you tell us to read, yet you don't hahaha. Like I said honestly where is your education from?

I showed two studies where the profile improved where introducing meat after being vegetarian. You were to busy typing BS to read it hahaha.

Who in their right mind would only give their kid whole milk in the first place. Secondly, that little excerpt doesn't debunk anything Cory.


You keep using one doctor, I named a few, and then showed you a blood profile report from a biochemist. But those must be faked etc huh. Damn you are ignorant. Read before you type Cory.

 

[MikeMartial]

Did Cory post #118, or are my eyes deceiving me?

Guys, while you are both posting in a mature manner (which I do appreciate), I'm not completely convinced the Sherdog MMA D&S forum is the platform for this kind of discussion; I'd like to see more in the way of nutrition affecting athletic performance, be it vegan, omnivore or carnivore.

The Vegan vs Carnivore and the baggage that goes with it will never be solved, at least not here.

Unless there's mass opposition from the readers of D&S, I'm going to lock this thread shortly.

 

[Vedic]

* The children who developed liver cancer from the nuts came from the best-fed (most affluent) families.
* These children consumed more protein than anyone else in the country (high quality animal protein).
* In studies on rats exposed to aflatoxin, only the animals fed 20% protein developed the cancer while those fed 5% got none.
* Reversing the diet of rats that developed cancer (from 20% to 5% protein) caused a reduction in tumor development; in rats (initially fed 5% protein), whose dietary protein was increased to 20%, there was an increase in tumor development.
* The dietary protein used in these experiments was animal protein

 

[Cory_Pilfold]

For the last time. Did you read where his whole theory was debunked? Fuck Cory, you tell us to read, yet you don't hahaha. Like I said honestly where is your education from?

I showed two studies where the profile improved where introducing meat after being vegetarian. You were to busy typing BS to read it hahaha.

Who in their right mind would only give their kid whole milk in the first place. Secondly, that little excerpt doesn't debunk anything Cory.


You keep using one doctor, I named a few, and then showed you a blood profile report from a biochemist. But those must be faked etc huh. Damn you are ignorant. Read before you type Cory.

One doctor? I've posted numerous sources from over 10 doctors and well known scientists? dont be a hypocrite son. BTW you have been debunked..


Imagine this scenario: your 12 month old baby is fussing because it is past his feeding time. You warm up his bottle of regular whole milk. No more infant formula. He looks healthy. You are feeding him well and you feel proud!

Wait a minute! There is something wrong with this picture.

It is the cow

 

[Cory_Pilfold]

Breast Cancer

Countries with a higher intake of fat, especially fat from animal products, such as meat and dairy products, have a higher incidence of breast cancer.13,14,15 In Japan, for example, the traditional diet is much lower in fat, especially animal fat, than the typical western diet, and breast cancer rates are low. In the late 1940s, when breast cancer was particularly rare in Japan, less than 10 percent of the calories in the Japanese diet came from fat.16 The American diet is centered on animal products, which tend to be high in fat and low in other important nutrients, with 30 to 35 percent of calories coming from fat. When Japanese girls are raised on westernized diets, their rate of breast cancer increases dramatically. Even within Japan, affluent women who eat meat daily have an 8.5 times higher risk of breast cancer than poorer women who rarely or never eat meat.17 One of the proposed reasons is that fatty foods boost the hormones that promote cancer.

The consumption of high-fat foods such as meat, dairy products, fried foods, and even vegetable oils causes a woman’s body to make more estrogens, which encourage cancer cell growth in the breast and other organs that are sensitive to female sex hormones. This suggests that, by avoiding fatty foods throughout life, hormone-related cancer risk decreases. A 2003 study, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, found that when girls ages eight to ten reduced the amount of fat in their diet—even very slightly—their estrogen levels were held at a lower and safer level during the next several years. By increasing vegetables, fruits, grains, and beans, and reducing animal-derived foods, the amount of estradiol (a principal estrogen) in their blood dropped by 30 percent, compared to a group of girls who did not change their diets.18

Harvard researchers recently conducted a prospective analysis of 90,655 premenopausal women, ages 26 to 46, enrolled in the Nurses’ Health Study II and determined that intake of animal fat, especially from red meat and high-fat dairy products, during premenopausal years is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Increased risk was not associated with vegetable fats.19

In addition, researchers at the Ontario Cancer Institute conducted a ****-analysis of all the case-control and cohort studies published up to July 2003 that studied dietary fat, fat-containing foods, and breast cancer risk. Case-control and cohort study analyses yielded similar risk results, with a high total fat intake associated with increased breast cancer risk. Significant relative risks for meat and saturated fat intake also emerged, with high meat intake increasing cancer risk by 17 percent and high saturated fat intake increasing cancer risk by 19 percent.20

Several studies show meat intake to be a breast cancer risk factor, even when confounding factors, such as total caloric intake and total fat intake, are controlled.21,22 Part of the reason may be that meat becomes a source of carcinogens and/or mutagens, such as HCAs, that are formed while cooking meat at high temperatures. A review of HCAs showed that certain HCAs are distributed to the mammary gland and that humans can activate HCAs ****bolically.23 As a consequence, frequent meat consumption may be a risk factor for breast cancer.21

Colorectal Cancer

As with breast cancer, frequent consumption of meat, particularly red meat, is associated with an increased risk of colon cancer.24,25 Total fat and saturated fat, which tend to be substantially higher in animal products than in plant-derived foods, and refined sugar, all heighten colon cancer risks. At Harvard University, researchers zeroed in on red meat, finding that individuals eating beef, pork, or lamb daily have approximately three times the colon cancer risk, compared to people who generally avoid these products. 25,26 A review of 32 case-control and 13 cohort studies concluded that meat consumption is associated with an increase in colorectal cancer risk, with the association being more consistently found with red meat and processed meat.12 And, in the recently published Cancer Prevention Study II, involving 148,610 adults followed since 1982, the group with the highest red meat and processed meat intakes had approximately 30 to 40 percent and 50 percent higher colon cancer risk, respectively, compared to those with lower intakes.27 In this study, high red meat intake was defined as 3 ounces of beef, lamb, or pork for men and 2 ounces for women daily, the amount in a typical hamburger. High processed meat intake (ham, cold cuts, hot dogs, bacon, sausage) was defined as 1 ounce eaten 5 or 6 times a week for men, and 2 or 3 times a week for women—the amount in one slice of ham. In addition, earlier studies have also indicated that those consuming white meat, particularly chicken, have approximately a threefold higher colon cancer risk, compared to vegetarians.28

Secondary bile acids are probably part of the problem. In order to absorb fat, the liver makes bile, which it stores in the gallbladder. After a meal, the gallbladder sends bile acids into the intestine, where they chemically modify the fats eaten so they can be absorbed. Unfortunately, bacteria in the intestine turn these bile acids into cancer-promoting substances called secondary bile acids. Meats not only contain a substantial amount of fat; they also foster the growth of bacteria that cause carcinogenic secondary bile acids to form.

Cooking methods that promote the formation of HCAs are believed to play a significant role in colorectal cancer risk. A case-control study in North Carolina that analyzed meat intake by level of doneness, cooking method, and estimated intake of HCAs in 620 colon cancer patients and 1038 controls, found that not only was red meat intake positively associated with colon cancer risk, but also pan-frying was the riskiest way to prepare meat due to high HCA formation.29 Confirmation of the link between frying and colorectal cancer risk was adduced in the review mentioned above, where high frying temperature was found to increase colon cancer risk almost twofold, and rectal cancer risk by 60 percent.12

Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is one of the leading cancers among men in the U.S., and researchers have explored a number of possible dietary factors contributing to prostate cancer risk. These include dietary fat, saturated fat, dairy products, and meat, as well as dietary factors that may decrease risk, such as the consumption of carotenoids and other antioxidants, fiber, and fruit. As with breast cancer risk, a man’s intake of dietary fat, which is abundant in meat and other animal products, increases testosterone production, which in turn increases prostate cancer risk. One of the largest nested case-control studies, which showed a positive association between prostate cancer incidence and red meat consumption, was done at Harvard University in an analysis of almost 15,000 male physicians in the Physicians’ Health Study.30 Although this study primarily analyzed plasma fatty acids and prostate cancer risk, the authors found that men who consumed red meat at least five times per week had a relative risk of 2.5 for developing prostate cancer compared to men who ate red meat less than once per week. The most comprehensive dietary cohort study on diet and prostate cancer risk reported on nearly 52,000 health professionals in Harvard’s Health Professionals Follow-Up Study, which completed food frequency questionnaires in 1986.31 The report, based on 3 to 4 years of follow-up data, found a statistically significant relationship between higher red meat intake and the risk of prostate cancer, with red meat as the food group with the strongest positive association with advanced prostate cancer. These and other study findings suggest that reducing or eliminating meat from the diet reduces the risk of prostate cancer.32

Other Cancers

Although not as extensively studied as breast, colon, and prostate cancer risk, a number of studies have concluded that meat consumption may play a significant role in kidney and pancreatic cancer risk. Three of eight case-control studies examining the relationship between renal cell carcinoma and meat consumption found a statistically significant increase in risk with a high consumption of meat. In addition, a prospective study in Japan found that people consuming meat daily had higher death rates from kidney cancer than those eating meat less frequently.5

Pancreatic cancer is relatively uncommon, yet it is frequently fatal, with fewer than 20 percent of cases surviving for one full year. Daily meat intake has been shown to be associated with increased pancreatic cancer risk in a number of prospective, cohort, and case-control studies.5 Some of these studies have singled out beef and pork consumption and have concluded there is a higher risk for pancreatic cancer with a higher intake of these foods.5 Dietary fat, saturated fat, and protein intake has not demonstrated a relationship with pancreatic cancer risk, however. This finding implies that cooking methods, and possibly HCA and PAH formation in cooked meat, might explain the association as well as some of the inconsistencies in data that show a relationship between meat in the diet and pancreatic carcinogenesis.5

 

[Vedic]

One doctor? I've posted numerous sources from over 10 doctors and well known scientists? dont be a hypocrite son. BTW you have been debunked..

Again, you didn't read the last page. Damn retards.
Imagine this scenario: your 12 month old baby is fussing because it is past his feeding time. You warm up his bottle of regular whole milk. No more infant formula. He looks healthy. You are feeding him well and you feel proud!

Wait a minute! There is something wrong with this picture.

It is the cow

 

[Cory_Pilfold]

Conclusion

Two themes consistently emerge from studies of cancer from many sites: vegetables and fruits help to reduce risk, while meat, animal products, and other fatty foods are frequently found to increase risk. Consumption of dietary fat drives production of hormones, which, in turn, promotes growth of cancer cells in hormone-sensitive organs such as the breast and prostate. Meat is devoid of the protective effects of fiber, antioxidants, phytochemicals, and other helpful nutrients, and it contains high concentrations of saturated fat and potentially carcinogenic compounds, which may increase one’s risk of developing many different kinds of cancer.

Vegetarian diets and diets rich in high-fiber plant foods such as whole grains, legumes, vegetables, and fruits offer a measure of protection.5 Fiber greatly speeds the passage of food through the colon, effectively removing carcinogens, and fiber actually changes the type of bacteria that is present in the intestine, so there is reduced production of carcinogenic secondary bile acids. Plant foods are also naturally low in fat and rich in antioxidants and other anti-cancer compounds. Not surprisingly, vegetarians are at the lowest risk for cancer and have a significantly reduced risk compared to meat-eaters.33

References
1. Thorogood M, Mann J, Appleby P, McPherson K. Risk of death from cancer and ischaemic heart disease in meat and non-meat eaters. Br Med J 1994; 308:1667-70.
2. Chang-Claude J, Frentzel-Beyme R, Eilber U. Mortality patterns of German vegetarians after 11 years of follow-up. Epidemiology 1992;3:395-401.
3. Chang-Claude J, Frentzel-Beyme R. Dietary and lifestyle determinants of mortality among German vegetarians. Int J Epidemiol 1993;22:228-36.
4. Barnard ND, Nicholson A, Howard JL. The medical costs attributable to meat consumption. Prev Med 1995;24:646-55.
5. World Cancer Research Fund. Food, nutrition, and the prevention of cancer: A global perspective. American Institute of Cancer Research. Washington, DC: 1997.
6. Skog KI, Johansson MAE, Jagerstad MI. Carcinogenic heterocyclic amines in model systems and cooked foods: a review on formation, occurrence, and intake. Food and Chem Toxicol 1998;36:879-96.
7. Robbana-Barnat S, Rabache M, Rialland E, Fradin J. Heterocyclic amines: occurrence and prevention in cooked food. Environ Health Perspect 1996;104:280-8.
8. Thiebaud HP, Knize MG, Kuzmicky PA, Hsieh DP, Felton JS. Airborne mutagens produced by frying beef, pork, and a soy-based food. Food Chem Toxicol 1995;33(10):821-8.
9. Sinha R, Rothman N, Brown ED, et al. High concentrations of the carcinogen 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo-[4,5] pyridine [PhlP] occur in chicken but are dependent on the cooking method. Cancer Res 1995;55:4516-19.
10.Jagerstad M, Skog K, Grivas S, Olsson K. Formation of heterocyclic amines using model systems. Mutat Res. 1991 Mar-Apr;259(3-4):219-33.
11.Murtaugh MA, Ma KN, Sweeney C, Caan BJ, Slattery ML. Meat Consumption patterns and preparation, genetic variants of ****bolic enzymes, and their association with rectal cancer in men and women. J Nutr. 2004 Apr;134(4):776-784.
12.Norat T, Riboli E. Meat consumption and colorectal cancer: a review of epidemiologic evidence. Nutr Rev. 2001 Feb;59(2):37-47.
13.Armstrong B, Doll R. Environmental factors and cancer incidence and mortality in different countries, with special reference to dietary practices. Int J Cancer 1975;15:617-31.
14.Carroll KK, Braden LM. Dietary fat and mammary carcinogenesis. Nutrition and Cancer 1985;6:254-9.
15.Rose DP, Boyar AP, Wynder EL. International comparisons of mortality rates for cancer of the breast, ovary, prostate, and colon, and per capita food consumption. Cancer 1986;58:2363-71.
16.Lands WEM, Hamazaki T, Yamazaki K, et al. Changing dietary patterns. Am J Clin Nutr 1990;51:991-3. 17.Hirayama T. Epidemiology of breast cancer with special reference to the role of diet. Prev Med 1978;7:173-95.
18.Dorgan JF, Hunsberger SA, McMahon RP, et al. Diet and sex hormones in girls: findings from a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:132-41.
19.Cho E, Spiegelman D, Hunter DJ, et al. Premenopausal fat intake and risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:1079-85.
20.Boyd NF, Stone J, Vogt KN, Connelly BS, Martin LJ, Minkin S. Dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a ****-analysis of the published literature. Br J Cancer. 2003 Nov 3;89(9):1672-85.
21.De Stefani E, Ronco A, Mendilaharsu M, Guidobono M, Deneo-Pellegrini H. Meat intake, heterocyclic amines, and risk of breast cancer: a case-control study in Uruguay. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1997;6(8):573-81.
22.Matos EL, Thomas DB, Sobel N, Vuoto D. Breast cancer in Argentina: case-control study with special reference to meat eating habits. Neoplasma 1991;38(3):357-66.
23.Snyderwine EG. Some perspectives on the nutritional aspects of breast cancer research. Food-derived heterocyclic amines as etiologic agents in human mammary cancer. Cancer. 1994 Aug 1;74(3 Suppl):1070-7.
24.Singh PN, Fraser GE. Dietary risk factors for colon cancer in a low-risk population. Am J Epidemiol 1998;148(8):761-74.
25.Giovannucci E, Rimm EB, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA, Ascherio A, Willett WC. Intake of fat, meat, and fiber in relation to risk of colon cancer in men. Cancer Res 1994;54(9):2390-7.
26.Willett WC, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA, Rosner BA, Speizer FE. Relation of meat, fat, and fiber intake to the risk of colon cancer in a prospective study among women. N Engl J Med 1990;323:1664-72.
27.Chao A, Thun MJ, Connell CJ, et al. Meat consumption and risk of colorectal cancer. JAMA 2005;293:172-82.
28.Fraser GE. Associations between diet and cancer, ischemic heart disease, and all-cause mortality in non-Hispanic white California Seventh-day Adventists. Am J Clin Nutr 1999;70(suppl):532S-8S.
29.Butler LM, Sinha R, Millikan RC, Martin CF, Newman B, Gammon MD, Ammerman AS, Sandler RS. Heterocyclic amines, meat intake, and association with colon cancer in a population-based study. Am J Epidemiol. 2003 Mar 1;157(5):434-45.
30.Gann PH, Hennekens CH, Sacks FM, Grodstein F, Giovannucci EL, Stampfer MJ. Prospective study of plasma fatty acids and risk of prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1994 Feb 16;86(4):281-6.
31.Giovannucci E, Rimm EB, Colditz GA, Stampfer MJ, Ascherio A, Chute CC, Willett WC. A prospective study of dietary fat and risk of prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993 Oct 6;85(19):1571-9.
32.Kolonel LN. Nutrition and prostate cancer. Cancer Causes Control. 1996 Jan;7(1):83-44.
33.Phillips RL. Role of lifestyle and dietary habits in risk of cancer among Seventh-day Adventists. Cancer Res 1975;35(Suppl):3513-22.

 

[Vedic]

Breast Cancer

Countries with a higher intake of fat, especially fat from animal products, such as meat and dairy products, have a higher incidence of breast cancer.13,14,15 In Japan, for example, the traditional diet is much lower in fat, especially animal fat, than the typical western diet, and breast cancer rates are low. In the late 1940s, when breast cancer was particularly rare in Japan, less than 10 percent of the calories in the Japanese diet came from fat.16 The American diet is centered on animal products, which tend to be high in fat and low in other important nutrients, with 30 to 35 percent of calories coming from fat. When Japanese girls are raised on westernized diets, their rate of breast cancer increases dramatically. Even within Japan, affluent women who eat meat daily have an 8.5 times higher risk of breast cancer than poorer women who rarely or never eat meat.17 One of the proposed reasons is that fatty foods boost the hormones that promote cancer.

The consumption of high-fat foods such as meat, dairy products, fried foods, and even vegetable oils causes a woman

 

[Cory_Pilfold]

Great and we are back to rat studies. I don't see where your coming from because ignorance is blatantly clear here. "read my side" you cry, yet then your own moronic ass, can't read where ADDING meat improved the blood lipids of a former vegetarian. It's PROOF, real world PROOF, not your Dr. mercola crap. As I said you can listen to Campbell, we all saw and read the debate(which you didn't obviously) and we all saw how that went(well except fort you since you didn't read it)

Umm..dude..I just posted a bunch of stuff FROM DR CAMPBELL's studies. You realize he's a vegetarian right? Even he knows that you get more than adequate protein from vegetables.

The information i just posted CAME FROM dr campbell..the very source you were trying to get me to believe, when I believe what he's saying..suddenly It's a lie now? Just because he's saying that meat and milk is unhealthy makes it untrue suddenly?

After all this time you've been trying to get me to believe in him?

Come on...The china study and DR campbell are closely linked (cornell / china)

::: THE CHINA STUDY :::

 

[Vedic]

Ya and here is his debate with Cordain. READ IT.

I never tried to get you to believe him. I listen to all types of docs. Just not hippies.

http://www.hacres.com/healthtipArticles2007/478_proteinDebate.pdf

 

[Cory_Pilfold]

Wow that showed me nothing

Thanks for proving my point that you don't read any of my sources, you just debunked yourself IMO. I posted that like 2-3 seconds ago, and you replied to it IMMEDIATELY AFTER. Saying that, When you didn't even read it. Thanks, you proved my point completely. BTW I'm done arguing, you lost. You don't read any of my sources, and even when I post something on DR campbell that says other wise to your beliefs..you still try and debunk it.

The fact is that the only legitimate source you gave me was dr campbell, and he himself is a vegetarian for 15 years. Obviously the study you're trying to get me to watch has to do with his earlier studies, when In fact..he has a completely different outlook now. And I showed that to you, He himself Proved everything I was trying to prove to you.

Like i said vedic, You're intelligent and you stick to your argument..but you need to be more open minded.

I'm a meat eater and I've been one my whole life, I still eat meat to this day..and I think I'll have a tough time trying to convert to vegetarianism. However, That doesn't mean that because I eat meat, Means I have to believe every little myth said about it..as far as health and nutrition is concerned. The fact is that the real university based evidence and science is backing up all my claims, and even the only source you posted..is backing up MY claims.

Honestly, You've lost..just give up, your argument has officially become NULL.

Ya and here is his debate with Cordain. READ IT.

I never tried to get you to believe him. I listen to all types of docs. Just not hippies.

http://www.hacres.com/healthtipArticles2007/478_proteinDebate.pdf

Sorry but I don't understand the logic that any doctor who believes meat and milk is bad for you, is automatically a hippie. I guess dr Campbell is a hippie too, because he proved everything that I was trying to tell you.

I guess people with serious university educations and science backing up their claims are hippies too, simply for telling the truth.

Stop being so close minded dude!! you're fucking smarter then that and you know it!

 

[stylesbjj**]

at improved the blood lipids of a former vegetarian. It's PROOF, real world PROOF, not your Dr. mercola crap.

Doesn't Mercola say the same thing you are saying about this subject?

 

[Cory_Pilfold]

Doesn't Mercola say the same thing you are saying about this subject?

ironically yes..LOL

 

[Vedic]

Thanks for proving my point that you don't read any of my sources, you just debunked yourself IMO. I posted that like 2-3 seconds ago, and you replied to it IMMEDIATELY AFTER. Saying that, When you didn't even read it. Thanks, you proved my point completely. BTW I'm done arguing, you lost. You don't read any of my sources, and even when I post something on DR campbell that says other wise to your beliefs..you still try and debunk it.

The fact is that the only legitimate source you gave me was dr campbell, and he himself is a vegetarian for 15 years. Obviously the study you're trying to get me to watch has to do with his earlier studies, when In fact..he has a completely different outlook now. And I showed that to you, He himself Proved everything I was trying to prove to you.

Like i said vedic, You're intelligent and you stick to your argument..but you need to be more open minded.

I'm a meat eater and I've been one my whole life, I still eat meat to this day..and I think I'll have a tough time trying to convert to vegetarianism. However, That doesn't mean that because I eat meat, Means I have to believe every little myth said about it..as far as health and nutrition is concerned. The fact is that the real university based evidence and science is backing up all my claims, and even the only source you posted..is backing up MY claims.

Honestly, You've lost..just give up, your argument has officially become NULL.

Let me dumby this as much as I can for you. I posted a debate. Numerous times. You didn't read it. That makes your debate thoughtless and one sided.

I gave you Cordain, I gave you Tipton, and loads of others IF YOU READ THE DAMN DEBATE.

I lost lol, what are we 18? Cory for fucks sake, read the damn debate, or shut the hell up. This teen age side debate from you is boring and plain out a copy and paste job from hippie sites. I linked you to the debate, you cry like a bitch for us to read your side, yet you don't do the same.

As grown ups we call that being a hypocrite.:icon_lol:

 

[Vedic]

Doesn't Mercola say the same thing you are saying about this subject?

It wasn't the point:icon_lol:

 

[Cory_Pilfold]

vedic can't prove anything to me any more..This argument is OVER.

 

[Vedic]

Thanks for proving my point that you don't read any of my sources, you just debunked yourself IMO. I posted that like 2-3 seconds ago, and you replied to it IMMEDIATELY AFTER. Saying that, When you didn't even read it. Thanks, you proved my point completely. BTW I'm done arguing, you lost. You don't read any of my sources, and even when I post something on DR campbell that says other wise to your beliefs..you still try and debunk it.

The fact is that the only legitimate source you gave me was dr campbell, and he himself is a vegetarian for 15 years. Obviously the study you're trying to get me to watch has to do with his earlier studies, when In fact..he has a completely different outlook now. And I showed that to you, He himself Proved everything I was trying to prove to you.

Like i said vedic, You're intelligent and you stick to your argument..but you need to be more open minded.

I'm a meat eater and I've been one my whole life, I still eat meat to this day..and I think I'll have a tough time trying to convert to vegetarianism. However, That doesn't mean that because I eat meat, Means I have to believe every little myth said about it..as far as health and nutrition is concerned. The fact is that the real university based evidence and science is backing up all my claims, and even the only source you posted..is backing up MY claims.

Honestly, You've lost..just give up, your argument has officially become NULL.




Sorry but I don't understand the logic that any doctor who believes meat and milk is bad for you, is automatically a hippie. I guess dr Campbell is a hippie too, because he proved everything that I was trying to tell you.

I guess people with serious university educations and science backing up their claims are hippies too, simply for telling the truth.

Stop being so close minded dude!! you're fucking smarter then that and you know it!

Ummmmm no hippies are yourself, with no formal education posting other peoples work without being able to decipher it. As I said, he proved nothing, you just quoted my reply with the study link, yet didn't read it. Fuck are you 12?