Human’s are omnivores; meaning that we can eat meat or plants; there is nothing inherently unhealthy about eating meat, and in fact there are some very strong arguments that eating grains is in fact less 'natural" and less healthy than eating meat;
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165764]Because there are always far too many variables involved to ever prove this outright, we have some clininal research that says volumes about mood irregularity, depression/negativity, and mental health issues associated with meat consumption.
http://nutritionfacts.org/videos/plant-based-diet-mood/
http://nutritionfacts.org/videos/improving-mood-through-diet/
[/QUOTE]
The speaker of course didn’t make mention of it, but if you stop and read the text in the video it says the study was among “Seventh Day Adventist Adults”. Did you not catch that?
You say there are always “far too many variables” involved, and then link to a very narrow study.
I’m guessing you found those videos through Google search to provide “clinical research” to support your position, but didn’t pay close attention to them. Otherwise, you have a very strong confirmation bias at work.
Even if science could prove something as immensely specific as ‘eating meat SPECIFICALLY creates greed, anger, and desire’…
If such a thing were true there would likely be some form of chemically traceable indication. It is after all a specific food substance entering the digestive system making it absorbable into the body and converting it to a specific energy.
There are similar unsubstantiated claims about certain foods being aphrodisiacs, but at least they have a bit of evidence to support them. Like the chemical phenylethylamine present in chocolate.
What sort of evidence for the connection to greed, anger, and desire does meat have?
In this thread, it seems the only argument in favor is an appeal to tradition, because a certain accepted religious scripture says so. Any results found in searching for real-world evidence to support it is then interpreted with confirmatory bias.
[QUOTE=LFJ;1165801]The speaker of course didn’t make mention of it, but if you stop and read the text in the video it says the study was among “Seventh Day Adventist Adults”. Did you not catch that?
You say there are always “far too many variables” involved, and then link to a very narrow study.
I’m guessing you found those videos through Google search to provide “clinical research” to support your position, but didn’t pay close attention to them. Otherwise, you have a very strong confirmation bias at work.[/QUOTE]
Also note I didn’t say this study was definitive. It doesn’t mean anything for sure, absolutely! That is what science is. You are projecting strongly with the rest of your post, so to entertain your wild assumptions about my life- I’ve personally met Dr. Greger and attended a lecture of his- so I may help you understand why I searched his site out. He travels the world offering free (only requesting cost of travel) lectures on the world’s latest/most prominent nutritional research and he is highly renowned as an MD and the world’s most all-encompassing nutrition research conglomerator for regular folk. This really has little to do with tradition on my end, and is more of a willingness to accept changes in my diet based on data (through scientific process) than you may be.
[QUOTE=LFJ;1165801]
Any results found in searching for real-world evidence to support [a pre-existing belief] is then interpreted with confirmatory bias.[/QUOTE]
Absolutely. In fact, Dr. Greger himself and several other of the worlds foremost researchers into lifestyle nutrition only became vegetarian and vegan AFTER the science showed just how useless and even detrimental having meat in a diet was.
Many of these are not social/psychological studies. Many of his articles reviewed (and usually presented) are among the highest respected peer reviewed journals in the world. Your statement is general and vague, affording it to be generally applicable and an overall safe statement. Indeed it is a wise statement, and I would encourage that prevailing “common knowledge” should not be confused with science. and that when there is surmounting evidence against our own practice, we should adjust our ‘certain attitudes and beliefs’.
If you are free of such similar biases, as your lecturing wants to show, then watch some of the videos Dr. Greger offers us. Some of our worlds largest, most reputable, and groundbreaking studies came from people who were not vegan/vegetarian and who switched diets AFTER their research found what it did. Also your statement really demeans of one of the most immense pillars of science today- peer-reviewing.
Yes, if you are doing the “Good and Bad are creations of ourself” bit again. In reality, there is health benefit, and benefit for reduction of greenhouse gases through vegetarian diet.
If it improves health conditions, reduces illnesses, then yes it has very strong potential to make one a better martial artist.. and there is a surmounting body of evidence showing that it does improve health conditions and reduce/prevent illness/disease. You had good wisdom on your piece about not maintaining stubborn/attached attitudes. I’d suggest that it was good practice for myself to start learning about why vegetarian/vegan diets can be a smart investment in health- I was also obsessed with meat eating that it is fine for years.
While humans can eat meat or plants, your quote means actually that humans do eat meats and plants.
taii gihk, I hope you realize the guy at that site is a very strong candidate of what LFJ warns about, confirmation bias. You should look more into this, because you usually are someone attempting to cut the rubbish on pseudo science, which this idea that “humans are just as good, or better off eating meat” simply is. Not only that, but there are many reasons we have seen from studies about why eating meat is inherently not optimal for health consumption. I’d suggest you to check out some of the science for yourself instead of letting the half-scientific man on the soap box tell you eating meat is okay. He also is making good money on the sales of his stuff there, so there is huge incentive for him to continue to propagate half-truths.
He makes some valid points, but from what I’ve read he exaggerates their applicability to the available science, making science sound like little more than guess work. Also I agree with him that eating farm raised, organic animals is immensely better for you than factory farmed, as our ancestors (those among them who did eat meat..) would only have eaten more free-range animals.
While he may be healthy, his diet is very similar to that of most vegetarians/vegans I know: except without the meat.- leaning to much appeal to people who wish to confirm their own bias that meat eating is healthy.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1165789]Normally I would encourage people to do their own research, but I am in the mood to be a bit helpful tonight so here are a few items to peruse:
[URL=“http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=521”]Did Shaolin Monks breach Buddhist Dietary Regulations?
by Dr. Meir Shahar[/QUOTE]
Do my own research? Give me a break.
You made a claim and I asked for your sources. You’ve given one and made a straw man of the other.
I am aware that Shakyamuni ate meat, even that he possibly died as a result of tainted pork.
I never made a claim about Shakyamuni’s diet or the dietary traditions of other Buddhist traditions, I specifically said Chinese Buddhists.
Again, Chinese Monastics who have taken or intend to take the Bodhisattva precepts do not consume meat. Of course not all Shaolin Warriors take the Bodhisattva precepts.
Shahar’s book expands upon that article.
http://books.google.com/books?id=KiNEB0H6S0EC&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=Meat,+Wine,+and+Fighting+Monks&
Should be noted that it deals mostly with legends, the propagation of literary motifs and the justifications of modern behavior.
[QUOTE=taai gihk yahn;1165793]Human’s are omnivores; meaning that we can eat meat or plants; there is nothing inherently unhealthy about eating meat, and in fact there are some very strong arguments that eating grains is in fact less 'natural" and less healthy than eating meat;
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/#axzz1r5xMy2pV[/QUOTE]
I imagine this will invariably lead to arguments about research methods but there is a preponderance of research indicating links between red meat consumption and increased cancer risk and cardiovascular disease (cholesterol).
Let’s not bring the whole paleo/primal fad dieting movement into it.
Nothing screams primal hunter gatherer bad ass as obsessing over food like a teenage girl with an eating disorder.
Being vegetarian is one thing and certainly has its own foibles but that whole evolution came to a dead stop twenty thousand years ago so we should only eat what cavemen ate is pure fad dieting ridiculousness.
monk soldiers did eat meat, but that was not a good thing. it brought embarrassment to the temple.
it had more to do with lack of buddhist discipline, weak faith, and too much contact with secular soldiers.
i lived in yangzhou and its well known story that in the qing dynasty some important shaolin monks went inside a brothel in broad daylight and gangbanged a prostitute.
i dont believe in vegetarianism, i love eat meat and see baby animals totured. but i think shaolin monk soldiers should not eat meat.
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165825]
Nothing screams primal hunter gatherer bad ass as obsessing over food like a teenage girl with an eating disorder.
[/QUOTE]
LMAO at this. 
I really think health of vegetarian/vegan diets depend on the genetic make up of the dieter.
I have a lot of trouble gaining weight/muscle and have genetically low cholesterol. I tried being a vegetarian for two years (over three years…had a year off in between)…didn’t work for me. Similar difficulties as Scott describes.
OTOH My Shifu is vegetarian and he manages to support a lot of muscle mass and still have more ‘extra’ mass than he’d like.
I think there’s a lot to be said for reducing one’s meat intake, and for finding better sources for one’s meat than the typical industrial nightmare, but I think cutting it out completely is only healthy for some people.
Most vegans that I have known seem very weak and unhealthy and unhappy-- sure there are exceptions though.
Wasn’t just Shaolin “doing evil and creating disturbances”.
[URL=“http://books.google.com/books?id=KiNEB0H6S0EC&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=Meat,+Wine,+and+Fighting+Monks&source=bl&ots=ai_Ek7ty_1&sig=aHAfItFT8OeXtJDfTcRh59eH808&hl=en&sa=X&ei=YaJ9T-aMFuagiAKR3eGHDg&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false”]The Shaolin monastery: history, religion, and the Chinese martial arts
By Meir Shahar Pg 47
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165816]Many of these are not social/psychological studies. Many of his articles reviewed (and usually presented) are among the highest respected peer reviewed journals in the world. Your statement is general and vague, affording it to be generally applicable and an overall safe statement. Indeed it is a wise statement, and I would encourage that prevailing “common knowledge” should not be confused with science. and that when there is surmounting evidence against our own practice, we should adjust our ‘certain attitudes and beliefs’.[/quote]
Yes my statements are somewhat general and vague, about as general and vague as as your own! If you choose to be veg good for you, if you choose to believe there is ample evidence that being a veg is better for you than meat eating good for you on that too. If you choose to ignore the fact that when it comes to science they CONSTANTLY produce conflicting evidence for just about everything having to do with humans, that is also your prerogative. One day something is good for you based upon the latest research, they next it is bad for you based upon the latest research.
So if you choose to live your life based upon whatever the latest research says you should do, feel free to be a slave to your own personal biases and flawed research. At least you can feel superior, if nothing else!
What will you do when the latest “peer reviewed” research demonstrates that meat eating is BETTER for you than a strict veg diet? My guess is you will find a rationalization to remain a veg. If you want to be a veg good for you, it is no better or worse than eating meat.
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165816]If you are free of such similar biases, as your lecturing wants to show[/quote]
Very nice!
I am lecturing and this is wrong! You are lecturing and it is okay, because you are a slave to the latest “peer reviewed” research, as if peer reviewed research is ALWAYS correct and free of bias. Humans are biologically omnivorous. we have been that way for something around 100,000 years, many people have inherent allergies to grains and gluten, I wonder why?
Maybe the latest peer reviewed research will tell us something?
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165816]Yes, if you are doing the “Good and Bad are creations of ourself” bit again. In reality, there is health benefit, and benefit for reduction of greenhouse gases through vegetarian diet.[/quote]
Based upon the latest peer reviewed research? The ones that are clearly biased? The ones based upon the “hockey stick” theory of the Middle Ages warming period, that has been demonstrated to be flawed, and from a biased point of view?
Greenhouse gases are a BENEFIT for the planet! They promote the growth of plants, and lengthen the growing season! Warming trends promote growth, cooling trends inhibit growth. When was the cooling trend that fostered an outburst of differing species of plants and animals on the planet again?
When you let others do your thinking for you, you become a blind follower prone to making foolish decisions and coming to foolish conclusions!
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165816]If it improves health conditions, reduces illnesses, then yes it has very strong potential to make one a better martial artist.. and there is a surmounting body of evidence showing that it does improve health conditions and reduce/prevent illness/disease. You had good wisdom on your piece about not maintaining stubborn/attached attitudes. I’d suggest that it was good practice for myself to start learning about why vegetarian/vegan diets can be a smart investment in health- I was also obsessed with meat eating that it is fine for years.[/quote]
Diseases also occur from eating plants, did you know that?
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165816]While humans can eat meat or plants, your quote means actually that humans do eat meats and plants.[/quote]
A mounting volume of peer reviewed evidence has demonstrated that humans are biologically designed to eat meat AND plants and have been so for at least 50,000-100,00 years
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165823]Do my own research? Give me a break.
You made a claim and I asked for your sources. You’ve given one and made a straw man of the other.[/quote]
It is not incumbent upon me to educate you! It is your responsibility to educate yourself! Take responsibility for yourself!
Neither is it my responsibility to convince you by a preponderance of evidence. You will believe what you want to believe for your own reasons.
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165823]Again, Chinese Monastics who have taken or intend to take the Bodhisattva precepts do not consume meat. Of course not all Shaolin Warriors take the Bodhisattva precepts.[/quote]
And many Buddhists eat meat, including Shaolin warriors!
You missed the fact that the legends are used to justify the eating of meat by Shaolin warriors. That is why there are legends and tales and stories, they are used to justify the behavior that ALREADY exists! Try to follow the argument and avoid relying on lame “it’s a straw man argument” excuses for not following the argument!
You conveniently avoided to the fact that Tibetean and Japanese Buddhists are “rarely” veg!
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165823]Should be noted that it deals mostly with legends, the propagation of literary motifs and the justifications of modern behavior.[/QUOTE]
No it doesn’t! That is your mis-interpretation of the article! (see above)
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165825]I imagine this will invariably lead to arguments about research methods but there is a preponderance of research indicating links between red meat consumption and increased cancer risk and cardiovascular disease (cholesterol).[/quote]
RiiIIIIIiiiiiight! The latest research! The latest fad, will be that it is sugar that causes high cholesterol NOT meat! The information is already out there!
Sugar, apparently, inflames the inside of veins and arteries that causes the cholesterol to adhere to the walls.
You are, once again, confusing correlation with cause! There are so many other factors involved in the human disease process that a clear cause cannot be established when it comes to things.
Is it meat? Too much meat? If too much meat, how much is too much? The wrong kinds of meat? If it is the wrong kinds of meat, what kinds are good and what kinds are bad? Is it meat in combination with something else, such as too much sugar? Is it too much meat in combination with too much sugar? How much is too much of both of these? Is it an individual’s genetics? Overall life attitude? The quality of the food consumed?
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165823]Being vegetarian is one thing and certainly has its own foibles but that whole evolution came to a dead stop twenty thousand years ago so we should only eat what cavemen ate is pure fad dieting ridiculousness.[/QUOTE]
And vegetarianism is NOT a fad?:rolleyes:
At least the paleo-diet is closer to the biological tendencies of humans than vegetarianism.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1165870]
And many Buddhists eat meat, including Shaolin warriors!
You missed the fact that the legends are used to justify the eating of meat by Shaolin warriors. That is why there are legends and tales and stories, they are used to justify the behavior that ALREADY exists! Try to follow the argument and avoid relying on lame “it’s a straw man argument” excuses for not following the argument!
You conveniently avoided to the fact that Tibetean and Japanese Buddhists are “rarely” veg![/QUOTE]
Dude, straw man argument is not an excuse when you consistently employ it.
I said CHINESE MONASTICS. CHINESE. I never said anything about Shakyamuni, or japanese, or Tibetan.
Again, from the beginning my point has been about CHINESE MONASTICS.
And specifically those who take the Bodhisattva precepts.
Still waiting for all those treatises about Buddhist Fighters.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1165870]No it doesn’t! That is your mis-interpretation of the article! (see above)[/QUOTE]
You’re all over the place. I was talking about the book where he further elaborates on the article. Try and pay attention.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1165870]RiiIIIIIiiiiiight! The latest research! The latest fad, will be that it is sugar that causes high cholesterol NOT meat! The information is already out there!
Sugar, apparently, inflames the inside of veins and arteries that causes the cholesterol to adhere to the walls.
You are, once again, confusing correlation with cause![/QUOTE]
Once again? Really? Where did I do that.
At this point you don’t even know who you’re arguing with anymore.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1165870]
And vegetarianism is NOT a fad?:rolleyes:
At least the paleo-diet is closer to the biological tendencies of humans than vegetarianism.[/QUOTE]
People have practiced vegetarianism for millenia.
You know what other paleo behavior is closer to the biological tendancies of humans?
Fucking one’s own sister and having a life expectancy of 25.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1125065]The past four days I have had steak 3 times and hamburger twice!
I acquired no karma from my actions![/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=wenshu;1125068]Your karma may be fine but you might want to get your cholesterol checked.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1125074]LOL!! Slightly high as of about 3 or 4 years ago!
But I can also go a month or two with very little meat in my diet too![/QUOTE]
Don’t recall this little exchange do you?
So what happened between then and now to make you go apoplectically blind with barely contained fury at the very mention of vegetarianism?
interesting how my simply pointing out that there are, at least what I believe to be, strong arguments supporting a meat-based diet gets me accused of lacking awareness of confirmation bias, not knowing how to read research, not looking at evidence for myself but simply following what one person on a soap-box says, being prone to following fads etc.
so, I guess that means agreeing w vegetarianism=having read the right research in the right way, whereas believing the contrary = having read the reaserach incorrectly or reading the wrong reasearch, or whatever;
gotcha
:rolleyes:
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165877]Dude, straw man argument is not an excuse when you consistently employ it.
I said CHINESE MONASTICS. CHINESE. I never said anything about Shakyamuni, or japanese, or Tibetan.[/quote]
Yes it is DUDE!! And DUDE…I said Shaolin Warrior monks, DUDE!!!
I brought up Buddha and the Japanese and Tibetans to demonstrate that there is a long history and pattern of Buddhists eating meat!
The implication from many of these American Buddhist veggie wannabes is that being a veggie is superior/better in some way, and this is a false presumption!
It is false from a spiritual perspective and it is false from a nutritional/health perspective.
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165877]Again, from the beginning my point has been about CHINESE MONASTICS.
And specifically those who take the Bodhisattva precepts.
Still waiting for all those treatises about Buddhist Fighters.[/quote]
Shahar’s article IS a treatise!! A treatise is a formal exposition. His article and his book from which he drew his article is a treatise. His treatise draws upon other treatises!:rolleyes:
Educate yourself if you are going to argue please!
From the beginning my point was the Shaolin warrior monks! They clearly ate meat and some of them took precepts AND ate meat!
The tales and myths were created in order to justify their eating of meat.
I guess you never heard of the Buddhist warrior monks from Japan or Tibet.
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165877]You’re all over the place. I was talking about the book where he further elaborates on the article. Try and pay attention.[/quote]
Uh Huh!!!:rolleyes:
And you missed the correlation between the Tales and Legends used to justify current behavior of eating meat, at that time!
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165877]Once again? Really? Where did I do that.
At this point you don’t even know who you’re arguing with anymore.
—I imagine this will invariably lead to arguments about research methods but there is a preponderance of research indicating links between red meat consumption and increased cancer risk and cardiovascular disease (cholesterol).
—Being vegetarian is one thing and certainly has its own foibles but that whole evolution came to a dead stop twenty thousand years ago so we should only eat what cavemen ate is pure fad dieting ridiculousness.
[/QUOTE]
Do you even read what you are writing?
The links between red meat and increased cancer and Cardiovascular disease are correlations NOT causes!!
The paleo fad is neither better nor worse than the veggie fad.
Eating meat and eating veggies both lead to disease processes in the body.
Most veggies claim that it only occurs with veggies who do not combine their foods correctly…hmmmm the same thing can be said about meat eaters. If they combine their meats AND veggies in a healthy manner they can avoid the Cancer and Cardiovascular diseases.
Apparently you don’t read your own postings!
[QUOTE=taai gihk yahn;1165881]interesting how my simply pointing out that there are, at least what I believe to be, strong arguments supporting a meat-based diet gets me accused of lacking awareness of confirmation bias, not knowing how to read research, not looking at evidence for myself but simply following what one person on a soap-box says, being prone to following fads etc.
so, I guess that means agreeing w vegetarianism=having read the right research in the right way, whereas believing the contrary = having read the reaserach incorrectly or reading the wrong reasearch, or whatever;
gotcha
:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Well understanding your own ignorance is the first step towards becoming a self-satisfied, superior vegetarian!
Which is the BEST kind of human being on the planet!!
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1165884]Well understanding your own ignorance is the first step towards becoming a self-satisfied, superior vegetarian!
Which is the BEST kind of human being on the planet!![/QUOTE]
but, and more importantly, it’s NOT a fad!
Ive done both.
I feel better and perform better when I eat meat.
I don’t eat red meat much, maybe once or twice a week, the rest is fish and chicken.
I love pasta and rice but notice that I get bloated when I eat them, but I love them so eat them more during the day and not in the evening.
I noticed that I have to eat a lot more protein rich veggies to feel the same way I do when I do eat animal based protein, but that could be just me.
I just know that for ME, I function better in all ways with animal based protein in my diet.
I know that because I h ave experimented and found that is best for me.
I respect that someone else mileage may vary of course.
[QUOTE=wenshu;1165879]Don’t recall this little exchange do you?
So what happened between then and now to make you go apoplectically blind with barely contained fury at the very mention of vegetarianism?[/QUOTE]
You don’t read or comprehend very well!
Read my final comments from the Shahar post!
[QUOTE=taai gihk yahn;1165885]but, and more importantly, it’s NOT a fad![/QUOTE]
Oh! Well never mind then!:o
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1165887]Ive done both.
I feel better and perform better when I eat meat.
I don’t eat red meat much, maybe once or twice a week, the rest is fish and chicken.
I love pasta and rice but notice that I get bloated when I eat them, but I love them so eat them more during the day and not in the evening.
I noticed that I have to eat a lot more protein rich veggies to feel the same way I do when I do eat animal based protein, but that could be just me.
I just know that for ME, I function better in all ways with animal based protein in my diet.
I know that because I h ave experimented and found that is best for me.
I respect that someone else mileage may vary of course.[/QUOTE]
For myself, I eat what I feel like eating when I feel like eating it.
I can go for weeks and not eat meat, or eat very little meat, but then I might eat meat everyday for a few weeks too!
I don’t worry too much about what I eat, except for limiting junk. Although I always drink milk no matter whatever else I eat. If I don’t I don’t get enough protein and calories.
My favorite breakfast is Whole Oats, with an egg or two cooked in, then I add, raisins, peanut butter, apple sauce (unsweetened), and cinnamon.
Plus milk!
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1165889]Oh! Well never mind then!:o
For myself, I eat what I feel like eating when I feel like eating it.
I can go for weeks and not eat meat, or eat very little meat, but then I might eat meat everyday for a few weeks too!
I don’t worry too much about what I eat, except for limiting junk. Although I always drink milk no matter whatever else I eat. If I don’t I don’t get enough protein and calories.
My favorite breakfast is Whole Oats, with an egg or two cooked in, then I add, raisins, peanut butter, apple sauce (unsweetened), and cinnamon.
Plus milk![/QUOTE]
I am lactose intolerant so I drink lactose free milk, when I drink milk.
Jack Lalanne would hate us both !
it’s interesting how, when u refer to someone who’s belief system u agree with, u characterize him as a respected researcher whose motivation is fueled by altruism:
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165816] Dr. Greger…travels the world offering free (only requesting cost of travel) lectures on the world’s latest/most prominent nutritional research and he is highly renowned as an MD and the world’s most all-encompassing nutrition research conglomerator for regular folk. [/QUOTE]
whereas when you reference someone whose perspective you disagree with, you characterize him as a psuedo-scientific hack whose main interest is to sell his product:
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165816]I’d suggest you to check out some of the science for yourself instead of letting the half-scientific man on the soap box tell you eating meat is okay. He also is making good money on the sales of his stuff there, so there is huge incentive for him to continue to propagate half-truths. [/QUOTE]
BTW, if you read the website and the downloads, u wud quickly realize that u cud pretty much learn the entire approach, shud u choose to do so, without sending him a dime; yes, he does hav products for sale; but he doesn’t jam them down ur throat, and again, pretty much the entire concept is available on his website for free; not that it means anything in terms of validity per se, but it isn’t consistent w sumone giving u sum teaser info in order to purchase their entire program;
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165816]He makes some valid points, but from what I’ve read he exaggerates their applicability to the available science, making science sound like little more than guess work. [/QUOTE]
have u read through his entire website? you might want to take a little time to do so - u may learn a thing or two about his rationale for his belief system being grounded in both personal experience as well as his take on the available research (sounds familiar…); or not, that’s fine as well; but u may want to suspend ur judegement regarding his capacity to synthesize relevant info and his pecuniary motivation
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165816] While he may be healthy, his diet is very similar to that of most vegetarians/vegans I know: except without the meat.- leaning to much appeal to people who wish to confirm their own bias that meat eating is healthy.[/QUOTE]
as opposed to your own belief that it isn’t, supported by the selective research that you have chosen to give credance to; what was that about confirmation bias again?
[QUOTE=Matthew;1165816] taii gihk, I hope you realize the guy at that site is a very strong candidate of what LFJ warns about, confirmation bias. You should look more into this, because you usually are someone attempting to cut the rubbish on pseudo science, which this idea that “humans are just as good, or better off eating meat” simply is. Not only that, but there are many reasons we have seen from studies about why eating meat is inherently not optimal for health consumption. [/QUOTE]
thanks for the primer on interpreting research; I guess I shoud get a refund from my master’s program in PT, bec obviously they didn’t do a very good job teaching me about it:rolleyes:
you know, it’s funny - I am really not advocating one position over the other - all I am saying is that there are, IMPO, valid arguments and perspectives that warrant a more expansive perspective than “meat is bad”; but u and Weshu r so high up on ur own soap boxes, that apparently you can’t accept the possibiity that vegetariansim is not the only approach to a healthy diet/lifestyle; instead, u and Wenshu characterize me as being taken in by the latest fad, and then dismissing me because of my supposed zealotry towards paleo / primal; not once have you taken the time to consider that perhaps I have a more developed perspective on the topic; instead, my supplying a contrary perspective gets me branded as some dupe with no ability to think for myself; if anyone are acting in a zealot-like manner, it’s you two, pushing ur perspective to the exclusion of others, whereas I and Scott are simply pointing out that it doesn’t seem to be as absolute as u claim
I think u both need to ease up on the spicy tofu…