Could you eat like a real paleolithic man? Or would you miss the paleo brownies and paleo beer?
Leave a comment either here or on facebook and let me know if it's something you'd consider.
Well, not much to say about this article by Julian Morgans other than click the picture, read the article, and discuss.
Could you eat like a real paleolithic man? Or would you miss the paleo brownies and paleo beer?
Leave a comment either here or on facebook and let me know if it's something you'd consider.
Its been a busy week this week, I've been accused by a vegan of pushing health assessments upon people, of being professor of nothing, and that I am a quack. To start with lets break them down.
Pushing Health Assessments;
I don't really push anything, I should push things but I'm more the kind of person that allows people to find me. Maybe its my Asperger's or maybe I'm just not a born salesperson, but I just refuse to cold call people and push my service upon them. You only have to ask my former bosses at Virgin Active or the many clients that have asked me to contact their friend to find out that "you must ask me about my help" I will not just contact people pushing my opinions. On top of that I find it bizarre that I'm accused of pushing anything when I'm faced with a vegan pushing his opinions upon me, remember I never contacted them. I just got spammed way back in 2011 and dared to ask for proof. Since then its been game of tennis with me asking for proof of the original statement and then various attempts to divert the debate such as calling my qualifications into question. Once again, remember that I just questioned the original statement and wanted proof, I made no attempt to stop anyone being a vegan (why would I, most are wonderful loving people) I just asked said that if your going to spam me with agressive vegan propaganda, be prepared to prove it. I'm still waiting...the game is afoot.
Secondly I don't understand what the issue is with assessing health? Whether we utilise a BioHealth #101 Metabolic Assessment Profile or complete one of the many in house assessments, it all helps build a picture. The other option is guessing which is what I assume the majority seem to do. Which would I rather do?? Well the answer to that is obvious, but which would you rather me do if you sought my help? Vegan diet is so I'm told a lifestyle, its seems to be a generic one thats apparently one size fits all. I doubt that exists but who am I to question the faith.
Being a professor of nothing and my quackery;
Now this is an odd one, I've never claimed to be a professor (i'd love to be one at some point but I'm not sure I could tie myself down to the rigidity of it all), so I'm not sure where that came from, especially from a Personal Trainer with a B.S (his words not mine) in Sports Science. I'm half way through a MSc in Psychology but my interest in that stems from wanting to understand the peculiarities of the human mind, and how it relates to people's need to control food intake (extreme dieters, those with eating disorders etc which extreme vegans could be classed as).
I'm not into pharmacuticals, not my trade but I appreciate that medicine has a place especially in acute illness, less so in chronic conditions which could be often far better managed through better diet and lifestyle management. So I don't aspire to be a Medical Doctor, only to work alongside them when needed to help individuals who seek my assistence.
"From the Astrologer came the Astronomer, from the Alchemist came the Chemist, from the Mesmerist came the Mental Specialist. The Charlatan is always the Pioneer. The Quack of Yesterday is the Professor of Tomorrow."
Dr Joseph Bell
Its now 11:30am on Sunday morning, just 1 hour after I started this blog post (I know I know, several distractions mainly lunch preparations and gazing at Daisy to check she's ok) and I've had yet another accusation of quackery. This time its from VoraciousVegan on twitter. This man/woman is a friend of Gary Mabs, he/she claimed to only know them via twitter yet knew I was referring to our friend from 2011 Gazzais Vegan whose recently started his propaganda mission once again to try and turn me to the darkside.
Quite ironic that the initials are VV considering the VV most of us all know, maybe she'll get involved at some point in the tweeting :-). VV2 wants to know my methods yet can't give me any specifics such as a problem he/she has so I can't really pinpoint where we'd need to start. Its a brave move calling me out on my failing to study at a medical school (other than 2008-2009 when I was frequently in lectures at QMC) when I've made it clear I have no desire to study medicine, I've also made it clear that I don't believe anyone should dictate a diet, not even a doctor but especially not someone is so hooked on a lifestyle and believes that it generically fits everyone. These vegan fanatics seem to follow the same logic as religious fanatics or even the school kids at school who wanted you to join the smokers club. Group think is a wonderful tool for a lack of independent thinking.
Considering this, its more likely that the extreme vegan is the quack (depending upon the reasons behind the lifestyle such as political, religious etc). Often vegan dieters base their choice upon faith rather than fact (wow a faith healer quack quack).
So, if I'm a quack, so be it. I'd rather take a considered evidence based approach to my own health and that of those that seek my opinion than to rely upon faith. If your a vegan and likely to comment could you please also include your real name, age etc and the reasons behind why your on a vegan diet, it makes it much more easy to understand your rationale.
Yours Billy "Donald" Craig
He's back, and this time he's accusing me of posting "unfounded, unresearched information" and then admitting it. This from a man that about 9-10 months ago spammed me with a message that animal fat kills, yet he can't or won't prove it. Possibly he can't prove it because no such evidence in exists.
Check out the last post and see if you can see where I post unfounded and un-researched information. It seems poor old Gary may be a tad confused.
Anyway, I thought I'd give him a few tips on evidence based research seeing as he seems to be really struggling finding the data to back up his belief/faith. I know Gary has studied Sport Science, but that may of been a while ago. Admittedly I am a Professor of Nothing as Gary stated on Sunday night, so please do your own reading around the topic. Oh and once again, I'm not hating on Vegan's, I'm happy for anyone to do their own thing, write about their own thing and live their own life. However, diets are much like religion, people frequently want to indoctrinate others. If you want to spam me with your faith/belief in a madcap diet or religion, at least have the decency to provide some evidence. If you can't prove that either god exists or that meat kills, keep it to yourself.
Remember, "getting sick is easy. All you have to do is read some books and websites on health and nutrition, create rules for eating based on what you think is 'good' or 'bad,' and follow those rules at all costs even when your body screams at you to stop."
Step 1 Formulate an Answerable Question
So, the question is "does animal fat kill?" Kind of a hard one to answer, as mentioned previously, do we force two groups to live in a lab with stress free conditions, no access to sugar, cigarettes etc etc whilst one eats just meat and one eats just bread?
Then what do we do? Is the quality of the bread important? Does it need to be organic? Should the grain be killed in a humane way? Killed directly in the field or do we pull the whole plant up and leave it to slowly die off? I've seen evidence of this vegan butchery in my local supermarket, poor plants left to die. Or will someone state that its not a true representation if one only eats bread?
Equally does meat quality matter, do our participants eat bacon and sausage, pepperami (its a bit of an animal) or do we feed them high quality pasture raised meats from animals that have been healthy? In the field of research it all matters Gary so the question needs a bit more work before we can truly answer it.
Check out the previous post on this topic
Step 2 Information Search
Now I really struggle on this one, and so does Gary. There just isn't a lot of data out there. Sure we have the China Study, but as you can see in this post about the China Study it is very very poor and actually disproves the theory. There was a Dr that Mr Mabs mentioned, but he was just selling a book and had no actual evidence other than hearsay. Even when pressed for peer reviewed research (not always that great either) the Doctors representatives just told Gazza that "all Fat kills", which he promptly (and rightly so) ignored. He just loves chewing is hemp seeds into hemp oil too much and wasn't willing to be that strict. Maybe I should spam him with hemp oil kills messages and warn him of the dangers of too much pufa in the diet...nah I'm not a dietary fanatic out to ruin his faith.
Step 3 Review of Information and Critical Appraisal
So, when we review the info we find that even we just can't find any proof (and neither can Gary. Have a review of this post to look at the lack of data and a little appraisal of Ancel Key's work.
To add to this I'm now being accused of ignoring things because it doesn't fit in with my state conditioned beliefs, and that I'm illiterate. Firstly Professor Mabs I have Asperger's Syndrome and Dyslexia, so maybe I'm not the best at literacy, but I'm pretty good (not a professor you understand) at researching health based topics and reviewing them (its why I'm patiently waiting for your data). My spelling and grammar has nothing to do with the topic in question i.e does animal fat kill. However it is another handy way to divert the attention from your lack of evidence isn't it.
Secondly, you don't know my beliefs. You just assume I'm some sort of caveman because I include meat in my diet from time to time. Grow up, if you are going to make a statement at least have the decency to admit it is based upon your preferences and not upon factual evidence. If you continue to insist it is based upon fact then produce the facts...otherwise grow some balls, man up, admit you were wrong. Then continue to eat your veggies and let other do as they wish. Stop tweeting and spamming your anger.
So to conclude, Gazza its great to hear you're still alive, I hope you've not been sick for the last 6 months, and that your sudden reappearance is due to the fact that you forgot that I asked for PROOF and not myths and lies. I appreciate your comments on my blog, but they are a little long in the tooth. How many more times can I ask you for proof and then watch as you ignore it and fire back another statement. Write me a proper article and I'll post it. This can be about why you ENJOY living the way you do or if you choose you can make it about why you think animal fat kills, however please include some statistically significant evidence.
"The trouble with the world
is that the stupid are cocksure
and the intelligent are full of doubt."
— Bertrand Russell
As ever, in the world of internet nutrition less competent people continue to rate their competence higher than it is. Don't get me wrong, we've all been there. I trained at the CHEK institute where they specialised in schooling us in a very cocksure but unscientific nutrition coaching method.
However, whilst I had cognitive bias I never forced it unwillingly upon people and if challenged I was always open to debate. That's how I got to where I am now, by being challenged and recognising that I wasn't and never will be the authority, or as Mabs referred to me, the Professor of Nothing. Sadly for all of us, he displays the Dunning-Kruger Effect probably better than anyone I've had the pleasure of meeting online.
Dunning-Kruger research suggest the competent overestimate others’ skill levels, but that the incompetent overestimate their own skill level and they lack the ability to recognise their own incompetence. In Gazza's case he could do with becoming better at evaluating his own limitations, or learning to keep quiet.
Kruger, J., and Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 77(6):1121-1134.
Guess whose back throwing down yet more accusations and bitchiness? It's only Gazza the Vegan...
Way back on the 4th November 2011 I got spammed (ironic) by a vegan called Gazza who wanted to enlighten me about his faith. I didn't ask for his advice but I received it, so you'd think I'd be entitled to ask for something of substance to back up his outlandish claims. Naturally I responded to the outlandish claims and pointed out a few facts, such as the complete lack of evidence to back up his claim. From my point of view I was neither arguing for nor against meat consumption, I just hate it when people go all high and mighty with no good reason.
You can read the post from November 2011 by clicking here and the whole saga of posts here in which he claimed stuff and I asked for PROOF. You can see his most recent response that he came back with today July 2012 below. Its obviously been bothering him all this time...
Bit of a random post, maybe high on hemp seed oil but what the hell its bound make a few of you laugh. My original post made no mention of a congenital birth disorder (McKeith has a scoliosis which I can't find out if it is actual congenital) I just said she looks terrible which is the general consensus amongst most of the public. Her skin is terrible and she lacks muscle tone and looks terribly gaunt...thats without doing any clinical tests on her. However, Gazza thinks I'm picking on her in an attempt to sell animal products, random accusation but hey ho, if he's buying I'm selling.
Next we move to the fact that he claims I've written B.S because I'm a professor of nothing to be exact. Well Gazza, you really are coming across a bit dim again, I've never claimed to be a professor (maybe one day fingers crossed), all I did was look at some data that doesn't back up your claim. You on the other hand were either too lazy to find proof, or it simply isn't true. In all these months you've struggled to find any significant data which backs up the B.S that you spammed me and many others with.
Either grow some balls and admit you have no proof and that its just your opinion, in which case stop pushing your opinion on others, or bring out the statistically significant data which backs up your animal fat kills statement...in other words, as usual prove it.
Over the past week we've been discussing scientific accuracy, and while their is no doubt that sick people get healthy when they change their diet in any positive way. Its how we deduce what the positive changes were that comes under scrutiny.
Everyone has a story to tell when they finally ditch their fast-food lifestyle.
Over the past week we've come up against the statement " animal fat kills" which can't be backed up with any statistically significant evidence. The whole plant based diet vs. animal food diet is more often than not based on a faulty argument. Their is no doubt that a diet of whole, unprocessed plant foods (natural foods) are far more nutritious than the typical a low-nutrient standard UK or American diet (SAD). The argument that animal fat (or even meat) kills wilts (plant based pun) when you consider that they usually base their argument on a SAD diet and not an unprocessed diet of natural animal products mixed with plant based foods.
Testing plant diet” against the “Standard American diet” and coming to the conclusion "animal fat kills" isn't really fair is it? Is it fair to consider steak in the same class as cake? So it seems that a great deal of the research out their that is used to demonize animal fat is actually refering to the SAD. Kind of SAD that they interchange things to suit the research. Our industrialised nation does consume meat, but we also eat a lot of toast, teacakes and hoover down crisps like they are some sort of legal high. Non industrialised nations such as the Masai, traditional Inuit (not the ones who have adopted western diets), and many others, are free from disease despite consuming animal products. Seems to me that the smoking gun is more likely to be held by the SAD.
Another popular vegan source of evidence is Dr Caldwell Esselstyn and his heart-disease-reversal diet. However, he recommends a massive reduction in all fat, not just animal fat. Wow, that means eliminating nuts, seeds, avocado, olives, and many other plant fats. Wow, he thinks that any dietary fat damages the endothelial cells and promotes heart disease so its an ultra low fat diet. Holy cow, what can a vegan eat then? Surely a tomato is ok???
Esselstyn advocates a diet that eliminates:
The "C" word is a popular swear word with plant food fans...I've been called it this week so I should know, damn me and my inability to fall in line. Luckily their is another "C" word that we can discuss.
Yep Cholesterol, nasty nasty natural cholesterol the natural and essential substance that is essential for human survival (oh yes it is) due to its important biological functions.
In the 80's we were told that dietary cholesterol from animal foods such as meat, eggs, and dairy products, tended to stay in the bloodstream and collect as plaque on the inside of our blood vessels to cause of coronary artery disease. That was the 80's though so research has moved on and so have we, oh wait some people are still stuck in the 80's.
Cholesterol in our body is regulated in relation to what we ingest from food. If we ingest too much (pretty hard to do) then our body slows down its cholesterol production, equally if we don't consume enough the body will manufacture more. Yes you read that right, our bodies naturally produce this so called "toxic" substance. Weird how our own body would try and poison us!! Unless its all a myth and cholesterol is actually essential to life. Check out this paper if you still believe dietary cholesterol is harmful.
I saw a great quote earlier in the week, sorry I can't reference it (I just can't remember whose blog I saw it on. It went something like this;
"A vegan lifestyle involves continuous animal abuse and cruelty. One has to ignore and override the 911 calls from the animal most intimate to us, our own body. Eating the nutrient dense red meat of ruminants is what made us large brained humans. Eating a diet that is contrary to our biochemistry and evolutionary history, is loaded with toxins anti nutrients for some generally abstract concepts leads me to regard the vegan lifestlye as a mental illness."
While the quote is very strongly worded from the opposite camp, (team paelo) it does have a point. Even a tomato eats bugs which means to be truly vegan you need to avoid tomatoes as well as a host of other plants that need some protein. With no evidence to back up the "meat is bad" argument it seems that they only case for veganism is personal choice (which we all should have), and because we don't like cruelty to animals. I hate animal cruelty but I'd like to point out a few factors;
Vegan's that buy vegan dog and cat food are being cruel to animals that need their natural diet.
If your deliberatly cutting something from your diet on a belief basis, surely that may count as cruelty, especially if you push it on others such as the case of this little ex vegan, or these shocking cases.
We have the freedom to follow whatever diet or beliefs we want, (and so we should) however, the moment we start preaching (and for my old mate Gazza, preaching doesn't just have religious meaning) we either need to back it up with "statistically significant" data or get the best indemnity insurance you can.
To conclude, eat whatever you want, its your choice. Just don't push your views on others without being asked. I'm sure most of you would be disgusted if I tried to push my views on the benefits of Hagen Daz Vanilla Ice Cream onto you wouldn't you??
Almost a week ago we heard from a vegan with the outlandish claim that "animal fat kills." Not context was added to the statement such as "if a ton of lard falls on top of you then it (animal fat) will kill you", or people eat too much factory farmed dirty grain fed meat and it contributes to disease amongst many other factors", or even "animal fat may be a factor in disease alongside such things as sugar, processed foods, sedentary lifestyles etc etc." Nope we got a point blank statement of "animal fat kills", which I find pretty offensive to say the least.
We've been all round the houses, changing the subject and so forth. Anything to hide the fact that the statement is nothing without proof. And as we've discussed before, correlation does not equals causation.
Anyway, while we wait for the data to show up lets look at some more nazivegan propaganda. Remember, 95% of vegan's are nice people, its just the ones on a crusade that you have to watch, their a probably just as many paelo (I was accused of being paelo yesterday) types that preach about eating meat, but for the most of it these two camps just live their lives doing what they believe in.
The lipid hypothesis
Their is plenty of controversy about the lipid hypothesis; low fat diets, low carb-high protein diets, the government approved food pyramid, vegan, veggie, weight watchers, breathatariens, and anything else that you can think of in the food and nutrition field. The similarity is they all claim to be the answer but its not that easy to just uncover the truth.
As my site always states, do not make medical decisions or changes (i.e., in your meds or diet) without consulting your a professional, at the same time never trust anyones word and always read things for yourself. As you may not be adept (or even interested hey Jane haha) in reviewing papers I like to do a little for you.
Where shall we start? With paleolithic man and the diet we think he ate. Or shall we start with the agriculture revolution about 10,000 years ago. The point where grain became popular and more available. Remember that 10,000 years is a blink of an eye in evolutionary terms when you consider that we evolve 1/10th of a % every 100,000 year. Between now and 100,000 years ago not a lot happened...until very recently. We can assume that we existed on whatever we could get. Fruits, seeds, berries, plants, meats (raw or cooked when fire became available) and so forth.
Then came processed foods with lots of nutrient deficient sugar added. Hmmm, we need to evolve quickly!!
Then when sugar became too expensive we turned to corn. Heck its natural so people will believe its good for them if we make high fructose corn syrup. We also started feeding corn (and lots of other weird things) to millions of cows in order to mass produce cattle.
So, how did we get where we are today? Its hard to pin it down to 100% undeniable evidence but it seems that government policy on diet, the food pyramid, grains, carbohydrates, dietary fats, may play a part in it.
So to the hypothesis Batman. Sadly a hypothesis isn't something a super hero would use. Its more of an observation or problem that can be tested by further investigation. Interesting stuff (well it is if your into nutrition research...)
Hypothesis are unproven, its a question and it needs an answer which is where the experiments or trials come in. They attempt to show whether or not the hypothesis holds true under the scrutiny of the science. Its simply not enough for anyone to stand up and say "animal fat kill", without data to prove it, it means as much as my statement Mmmm, meat tastes good. Unless I can prove it then its just my personal (or mine and some friends) thoughts.
Most hypothesis are tested to prove or disprove its validity. Sadly bias inadvertently or purposefully often occurs as most people want to be right no matter what.
In the 1950s a researcher named Ancel Keys conducted the "Seven Countries Study" which became the basis for the contention that cardiovascular disease was largely the result of high serum cholesterol levels brought on by a diet high in saturated fat. Now Ancel had done some great work before (see my posts on his work) which meant he was respected. He spent a fortune on the study (funded) so he kind of needed to be right to save face.
I have 1385 pages of Ancel Keys Biology of Human Starvation sat in my library here so I love the guy. However, his "lipid hypothesis" is a perfect example of how bias affected the research results. Keys was, prove his hypothesis, even selecting only data that supported it just like Campbell in the China Study.
Keys hypothesised that a high fat diet, particularly a diet high in saturated fat, was a major contributor to high cholesterol, which leads to heart disease in the form of arteriosclerosis (arterial plaque build-up).
However, much like the "China Study", independent analysis of the data shows that he "cherry picked" only the countries with numbers that supported his hypothesis and omitted the significant data that showed there was actually no correlation between dietary fat, cholesterol, and arteriosclerosis. Hmmmm!!
Inconclusive data didn’t stop Keys from using data from seven countries that supported his lipid hypothesis. When subsequent researchers reviewed the entire data that were available to Keys, they were astonished to learn that there was no correlation in the data to support Keys hypothesis. Oh dear...
Despite this the study is quoted as proof time and time again that saturated fat is a major contributing factor in arteriosclerosis. Reading What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie? is where I start most of my clients that ask about it. Its defiantly worth a look.
The consumption of red meat, butter, and other sources of saturated fats is at an all time low, yet obesity is at epidemic proportions, diabetes is highly prelevent. My vegan friend would say this is because we aren't strict enough, but if veganism is the answer surely eating less meat (like we are) would have an effect?
But the official response from Gazza the vegan, with his data that actually backs up his statement is currently a deafening silence.
Why? Could it possibly be because it would mean an admission that he was wrong? Too strong in his statement which he can't prove.
Well, there you go another piece of anti animal fat research that actually doesn't prove anything of the sort. In the interest of fairness I will of course present all of the evidence in support of the "animal fat kills hypothesis. It is as follow;
(note to self, leave space blank for any supportive evidence that might appear.)
Sadly I'm not joking, other than the above and Campbell's also selectivly biased work, there is no evidence that actually supports the argument. No doubt people will keep trying to find some, its just not appeared yet despite lots of years trying to find it. Its only been a week for my Nazivegan friend so in the context of things (and judging by his research skills), it may take a while.
To leave things on a light hearted note, here is something to put a smile on yourself. Don't personally follow it myself as you probably know, I don't consume pork. Funny all the same though.
And to even it up, don't want to be biased like the research do we. A little vegan treat...enjoy
I love belief, often its all we have in the health circus. Many theories cannot be tested properly due to lack of funding or ethical reasons. If I make a statement that has no scientific evidence I would qualify it with "I believe" this to be true etc etc. Reading something in a book or seeing a factor such as fatty build up in arteries during autopsy does not give us answers. It points us in the direction of a research question such as "Does animal fat kill?" Categorically it does not give us an answer until we have data that significantly proves it.
If it was possible to prove it I believe (I can't 100% say yet because its not happened) that Gazza the Vegan (check my previous posts for details of the vegan crusade that is currently ongoing on twitter), would prove it and clear up any doubts myself that the rest of the world has. But he doesn't want to do that for some reason and keeps deflecting onto arguments about fires and evolution.
Without well-designed studies, do we know that answer to the question? To Gazza belief is far more important than scientific evidence, and thats fine. It just doesn't give you any real evidence to make a wild claim such as "animal fat kills." I mean buses kill, so does that mean buses kill everyone? Making such a statement without evidence to back it up just makes it like a playground argument where you end up going round in circles. It gets even more childish when one starts spouting about being "220 lbs." Its like the "my dads bigger than your dad" argument at school...arghh I'm digging myself a big hole so lets throw some muscle around.
Carl Sagan summed it up well when he said, "Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." However for this particular vegan (remember most vegans are lovely people) it seems, "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary belief."
To date the only data Gazza has showed up with is the much debunked China Study and sadly for him it showed that meat significantly protected against heart disease. so here's some more links that also critique the work.
I know Gazza will chime in with "its a conspiracy", and that they are all anti-vegan (which they aren't, and most importantly I'm not), but remember, Campbell is pro-vegan who hid the data that proved meat wasn't the killer he thought it was. Its been quite sometime waiting for his data the shows "significant statistical" evidence that "animal fat kills," and I'm not sure its ever coming.
I ♥ MEAT as part of a mixed diet
My debate with Gazza continues. The original statement has shifted from "animal fat kills". We've now had a variety of differing statements that point the finger at meat as the cause of lots of things. From heart disease (despite vegan's favorite research the China Study showing statistically significant data that meat protects against heart disease), through to cancer but we are yet to see any data backing it up other than the odd mention of MD's clinical findings. Its all well and good stating Dr. X has seen atherosclerosis in patients but you can't claim its animal fat to blame unless the subject in question has lived their life under strict test conditions. Have the subjects eaten processed foods? Have they consumed a great deal of sugar? Were trans fats included in the diet, blah blah blah. Yes we frequently see people with atherosclerosis and the eat meat.
Maybe we could test it correctly, we could start with some dependent variables (DV) such as various health tests, maybe a questionnaire to assess health and/or dietary beliefs and so on. Then we could have some independent variables (IV), and it is these that we can manipulate to get the data we require. So, we could have;
Non Meat Eaters
The vegans I've met (bear in mind I regularly visit a vegan shop) are mostly smug and holier than thou. They think they are healthier and want to convert us all.
Scientist have found that vegans seem to run a greater risk of developing blood clots and atherosclerosis (remember even Campbell found this in his China Study, he just hid it). They also tend to have lower HDL (or "good") cholesterol.
I don't hate vegans I just can't see any evidence that backs up the argument to become one. Each week I eat few servings of organic chicken and wild fish, and some organic red meat as long as its grass-fed. I ate as a vegetarian and developed a serious amount of tooth decay and had to discontinue the experiment due to the ill health it brought. Gazza says this is due to vegetarians consuming dairy, but its interesting that I never consumed any dairy until 2 months ago so it does leave a big question-mark over why I got so sick.
I've still not managed to narrow down what Gazza actually eats? I've asked if tomatoes are allowed but he's not replied. I've also asked of vegan mothers are allowed to breast feed their babies, or if they do will they be removed from the cult?
Vegans tend to rely on lots of TVP (textured vegetable protein) which makes the fact that Gazza insisted I needed to kill a cow with my hands to be a meat eater. Not quite sure how a vegan would make TVP or their seed oils by hand but he lets not be picky. TVP is soy, one of the most dangerous foods on the planet, loaded with phyto-estrogens and phytates that stop the absorption of nutrients and disrupt hormone balance. Oh and they are also linked to the big C as well.
I don't recommend any of you go out and stuff yourself with KFC or burger kings, I also don't encourage caveman style diets with ultra high protein consumption. I typically eat meat once a day but sometimes only 3 times a week now. However, science shows us we cannot live long term without animal protein. You can and should enjoy your food and not restrict whole food groups. Their is categorically nothing wrong with salmon, chicken, and I would always aim to consume meat that contains collagen on a weekly basis. We need the protein and the nutrients these foods deliver.
Support my Independent Research and get exclusive content at on Patreon
The material provided here is for educational and informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. The information contained in this site should not be used to diagnose or treat any health problems. Always consult your physician or health care provider, before beginning any nutrition or exercise program. Use of the programs, advice, and other information contained in this site is at the sole choice and risk of the reader.