again, what is wrong with eating steak everyday? Please point to something in the meat that would be detrimenal. AT this point, people that are against red meat consumption can hang their hats on only 2 things, 1. saturated fat which only 50% of it is 2. cholesterol
and the fact that these 2 points have been clearly absolved of ill health, what is it about red meat? why not white meat, or fish, or whatever… hint, it’s not a problem if it’s real food.
Agreed, I eat steak 2 to 3 times per days, 5 to 6 days per week and aside from EVERYONE telling me to stop, and that it will ruin me, I’m feeling excellent and dropping body fat at a rate of about 1/4 pound per week, while retaining all my muscle.
How about a list of reasons that this may be harmful or detrimental.
Thursdays and Fridays I tend to steer towards Cherrystones and Oysters, so your point of other healthy proteins is something that is certainly valid, but is there any concrete reasons not to consume beef daily?
I eat grass fed beef every day.
I also eat free-range eggs every day. (Side Note)
My blood panel rocks.
I also test in the top 6% in Testosterone.
Show me the bodies. People are dying from inflammation not lean beef.
Cheers,
JK
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Sxio wrote:
You guys make interesting points. Through my work I have a few quite elderly clients who are in tremendous shape. I also know people who are 10 years younger who are just done. They’re shot.
Now we can all talk about what may have caused this till the cows come home (and we eat them) but at the end of the day, I don’t know why some people are finished by 68 and others are still sharp at 80, but I’m doing what I can to live a healthy life. Not to have a great 30s and 40s, but to be functioning optimally for as long as possible.
I still indulge. I still do things that are ‘bad’. But rarely. If you’re eating grass fed meat, that’s definitely a big plus but I can’t see how eating it every day is a good idea when there’s other great forms of protein out there.
I’m not trying to sound like a zealot. I’m just for moderation. Steak ain’t that great that it should be eaten every day. 2-3 times a week? Hell yeah. But not every day. And definitely with a big serve of veges to help move it along your digestive tract. [/quote]
That depends on what your goals are. People who talk like you usually don’t have 20" arms.[/quote]
LMAO…classic professor X.
Here’s what I don’t understand, Jehova’sFitness. You condemn wheat consumption in that other thread, yet extol the virtues of red meat to anyone who will listen. The case against wheat is much flimsier, yet you make profound statements such as “eliminating from the American diet will eliminate the rates of chronic diseases” or something like that.
And yet when somebody dares to suggest that consuming eggs, fish, poultry & dairy preferentially to beef is a healthier long-term plan, you get up in arms, saying that the mounds of evidence supporting this is all worthless, that the researchers conducting it are biased or agenda-driven, and so forth.
I just can’t seem to make sense of your position.
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Here’s what I don’t understand, Jehova’sFitness. You condemn wheat consumption in that other thread, yet extol the virtues of red meat to anyone who will listen. The case against wheat is much flimsier, yet you make profound statements such as “eliminating from the American diet will eliminate the rates of chronic diseases” or something like that.
And yet when somebody dares to suggest that consuming eggs, fish, poultry & dairy preferentially to beef is a healthier long-term plan, you get up in arms, saying that the mounds of evidence supporting this is all worthless, that the researchers conducting it are biased or agenda-driven, and so forth.
I just can’t seem to make sense of your position.[/quote]
I just don’t see the mounds of evidence, or any evidence at all, that poultry and fish are healthier long term compared to beef. If you examine societies which existed for the most part solely on beef and beef products there is no deterioration in health. The “study” at the top of this thread has already been ripped to shreds as correlation of lifestyle pattern, not beef. There is no isolation of the red meat variable necessary to even approach making a statement about red meat and mortality.
[quote]KODOM wrote:
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Here’s what I don’t understand, Jehova’sFitness. You condemn wheat consumption in that other thread, yet extol the virtues of red meat to anyone who will listen. The case against wheat is much flimsier, yet you make profound statements such as “eliminating from the American diet will eliminate the rates of chronic diseases” or something like that.
And yet when somebody dares to suggest that consuming eggs, fish, poultry & dairy preferentially to beef is a healthier long-term plan, you get up in arms, saying that the mounds of evidence supporting this is all worthless, that the researchers conducting it are biased or agenda-driven, and so forth.
I just can’t seem to make sense of your position.[/quote]
I just don’t see the mounds of evidence, or any evidence at all, that poultry and fish are healthier long term compared to beef. If you examine societies which existed for the most part solely on beef and beef products there is no deterioration in health. The “study” at the top of this thread has already been ripped to shreds as correlation of lifestyle pattern, not beef. There is no isolation of the red meat variable necessary to even approach making a statement about red meat and mortality. [/quote]
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Here’s what I don’t understand, Jehova’sFitness. You condemn wheat consumption in that other thread, yet extol the virtues of red meat to anyone who will listen. The case against wheat is much flimsier, yet you make profound statements such as “eliminating from the American diet will eliminate the rates of chronic diseases” or something like that.
And yet when somebody dares to suggest that consuming eggs, fish, poultry & dairy preferentially to beef is a healthier long-term plan, you get up in arms, saying that the mounds of evidence supporting this is all worthless, that the researchers conducting it are biased or agenda-driven, and so forth.
I just can’t seem to make sense of your position.[/quote]
Now, there could be a case for whole wheat bread without all the extra shit that’s in it these days (say maybe some Ezekiel bread).
There’s nothing inherently bad about meat, as in it does not cause over consumption (if anything reduces consumption), it improves blood lipid levels.
Wheat increases blood sugar rapidly, which we know the damaging effects of constant blood sugar spikes. It increases appetite, and it can be addictive for some people.
That at least give you insight on some of my thoughts?
KODOM, lol
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
again, what is wrong with eating steak everyday? Please point to something in the meat that would be detrimenal. AT this point, people that are against red meat consumption can hang their hats on only 2 things, 1. saturated fat which only 50% of it is 2. cholesterol
[/quote]
my family (lol) interpreted the study on red meat killing you is because it causes colon cancer. go figure.
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
again, what is wrong with eating steak everyday? Please point to something in the meat that would be detrimenal. AT this point, people that are against red meat consumption can hang their hats on only 2 things, 1. saturated fat which only 50% of it is 2. cholesterol
[/quote]
my family (lol) interpreted the study on red meat killing you is because it causes colon cancer. go figure.[/quote]
sorry, yes, there’s the cancer part too. Then the question is, what in the meat would cause cancer in humans but not other meat eating animals?
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
again, what is wrong with eating steak everyday? Please point to something in the meat that would be detrimenal. AT this point, people that are against red meat consumption can hang their hats on only 2 things, 1. saturated fat which only 50% of it is 2. cholesterol
[/quote]
my family (lol) interpreted the study on red meat killing you is because it causes colon cancer. go figure.[/quote]
sorry, yes, there’s the cancer part too. Then the question is, what in the meat would cause cancer in humans but not other meat eating animals?[/quote]
well the biggest myth that runs around my dinner table is “red meat plugs me up for days”. apparently they think it takes longer to digest and pass than chicken or fish. i find if i get adequate fibre i have no problems with red meat.
i guess people equate the “plugging up” of red meat with colon cancer?
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
again, what is wrong with eating steak everyday? Please point to something in the meat that would be detrimenal. AT this point, people that are against red meat consumption can hang their hats on only 2 things, 1. saturated fat which only 50% of it is 2. cholesterol
[/quote]
my family (lol) interpreted the study on red meat killing you is because it causes colon cancer. go figure.[/quote]
sorry, yes, there’s the cancer part too. Then the question is, what in the meat would cause cancer in humans but not other meat eating animals?[/quote]
well the biggest myth that runs around my dinner table is “red meat plugs me up for days”. apparently they think it takes longer to digest and pass than chicken or fish. i find if i get adequate fibre i have no problems with red meat.
i guess people equate the “plugging up” of red meat with colon cancer?[/quote]
Taubes rips the red meat and colon cancer correlation to shreds in GCBC as well.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
again, what is wrong with eating steak everyday? Please point to something in the meat that would be detrimenal. AT this point, people that are against red meat consumption can hang their hats on only 2 things, 1. saturated fat which only 50% of it is 2. cholesterol
[/quote]
my family (lol) interpreted the study on red meat killing you is because it causes colon cancer. go figure.[/quote]
sorry, yes, there’s the cancer part too. Then the question is, what in the meat would cause cancer in humans but not other meat eating animals?[/quote]
Would grilling the meat (charred) pose any ill effects? Is that taken into account with these studies?
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
again, what is wrong with eating steak everyday? Please point to something in the meat that would be detrimenal. AT this point, people that are against red meat consumption can hang their hats on only 2 things, 1. saturated fat which only 50% of it is 2. cholesterol
[/quote]
my family (lol) interpreted the study on red meat killing you is because it causes colon cancer. go figure.[/quote]
sorry, yes, there’s the cancer part too. Then the question is, what in the meat would cause cancer in humans but not other meat eating animals?[/quote]
Would grilling the meat (charred) pose any ill effects? Is that taken into account with these studies?
[/quote]
No it is not part of the studies, though yes is important. However, this study was flawed on so many levels that even debating cooking methods or grass-fed is a moot point
[quote]KODOM wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
again, what is wrong with eating steak everyday? Please point to something in the meat that would be detrimenal. AT this point, people that are against red meat consumption can hang their hats on only 2 things, 1. saturated fat which only 50% of it is 2. cholesterol
[/quote]
my family (lol) interpreted the study on red meat killing you is because it causes colon cancer. go figure.[/quote]
sorry, yes, there’s the cancer part too. Then the question is, what in the meat would cause cancer in humans but not other meat eating animals?[/quote]
well the biggest myth that runs around my dinner table is “red meat plugs me up for days”. apparently they think it takes longer to digest and pass than chicken or fish. i find if i get adequate fibre i have no problems with red meat.
i guess people equate the “plugging up” of red meat with colon cancer?[/quote]
Taubes rips the red meat and colon cancer correlation to shreds in GCBC as well.
[/quote]
does he really? awesome. that book is still on my “to read” list.
[quote]Sxio wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
That depends on what your goals are. People who talk like you usually don’t have 20" arms.[/quote]
I’m sure there’s plenty of reasons why we don’t rely on people with 20"+ arms for all our nutritional advice regarding health.
[/quote]
I didn’t say you should rely on people with 20" arms for all nutrition advice. I said most people who act like you never get to that level.
You said there is no reason to eat meat everyday. How you eat depends on what your goals are physically and I eat red meat pretty much everyday. I just had blood work done a month ago and I am doing fine.
You are making these “rules” independent of the physical goals of someone else, and sorry, but the body of someone actively gaining muscle and training everyday SERIOUSLY is NOT the same as the body of someone who is way less active and isn’t even trying to gain much size at all.
The person sitting on his ass all day may want to eat differently than the guy in the gym 6 days a week who keeps gaining muscle.
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]KODOM wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
again, what is wrong with eating steak everyday? Please point to something in the meat that would be detrimenal. AT this point, people that are against red meat consumption can hang their hats on only 2 things, 1. saturated fat which only 50% of it is 2. cholesterol
[/quote]
my family (lol) interpreted the study on red meat killing you is because it causes colon cancer. go figure.[/quote]
sorry, yes, there’s the cancer part too. Then the question is, what in the meat would cause cancer in humans but not other meat eating animals?[/quote]
well the biggest myth that runs around my dinner table is “red meat plugs me up for days”. apparently they think it takes longer to digest and pass than chicken or fish. i find if i get adequate fibre i have no problems with red meat.
i guess people equate the “plugging up” of red meat with colon cancer?[/quote]
Taubes rips the red meat and colon cancer correlation to shreds in GCBC as well.
[/quote]
does he really? awesome. that book is still on my “to read” list.[/quote]
GCBC was the first serious attempt to apply the scientific method to the relationship between diet and health. Makes all the “studies” that “prove” fat is bad seem like crazy idiot gibberish. These people are literally just making stuff up. GCBC will go down as a turning point in history.
To be clear: GCBC is the result of Taubes attempt to answer a simple question, “Is the Lipid Hypothesis correct?” It is not. It is false. The evidence proves it, incontrovertibly. No one is free to believe it any more.
Then, of course, with fat cleared, the prime suspect becomes carbs. Taubes is clear this is not proven correct, which is why he calls it “the alternative hypothesis.” He has been trying to get the entrenched authorities to actually test both hypotheses against each other since GCBC came out in 2007. They refuse, so now he and a MD (Peter Attia) have teamed up to form a non-profit to carry out clinical trials testing the fat and carbs hypotheses.
There seems to be quite a bit compared to decades ago of low-carb research from Dr. Volek and Dr. Westman coming out these days. Granted, it doesn’t get the attention it deserves.
GCBC also goes on a tangent IMO in the 2nd half of the book about his view on what causes obesity. It’s intriguing theory though.
Someone else has an issue with the study.
omg u guizzz