What a bunch of crap! I can’t believe you guys have gotten into such a pissing contest over a diet book. Taking in less calories than burned = weight loss. End of discussion.
Boogabrain: Was Johannes Wolfgang von Goethe an Existentialist? Ever read Levinas?
Anyhow, I think that most are confusing this “Eat Right for Your Blood Type” dieting (loosely used) philosophy as strictly one for losing weight and cutting bodyfat. It seems to me that these things are just a byproduct of the larger picture, which is the promotion of one’s health and well being. Many overlook the symbiotic effect each and every obscure component of the body has on those that are more well known and emphasized. For example, although strengthening the infraspinatus and teres minor, or the muscles that externally rotate the shoulders. Training them is not going to do much for visual impact, but from a biomechanical perspective they help stabilize the shoulder and thus protect it from injury, which in turn will allow one to train with greater loads or more frequency and thus build muscle (there is your visual impact).
The point I am making is that all should try to see the bigger picture in every philosophy. This point has been stressed time and time again, but what good are big muscles and ripped abs if one is not functioning well in other facets of health and life? We can have our cake and eat it too, or in this case look good naked and be holistically healthy. We just need to uncover the OPTIMAL way to do this, and certain keys to unlocking this mystery lie within every philosophy, be it reinforcing or eliminating. Time dictates which the philosophy falls under, and thus will be the case here.
A Girl, how about I make it simple for everyone? If it’s man made, don’t eat it! So that means stick to the natural foods: fruits, veggies, meat, nuts, etc! If it’s processed or comes in a box, then it’s not good for you!
This message is in response to A Girl’s comment that a hypocaloric diet=weight loss. I have heard this comminet made several times recently and it is making me sick. Sure, if you take in fewer calories than you burn you lose weight. The problem is: Where does that weight come from? I would think that anyone who reads T-mag or anyone who wants to “look better nekid” as TC says is interested in maximizing loss of fat “weight” and minimizing loss of or gaining muscle “weight”. This is where the diet stuff gets complicated…everyone wishes they could get ripped and maintain or gain muscle by “just eating submaintenance calories”. BTW I think that John Berardi is doing the most of anyone i’ve ever read on devising a practical plan for getting ripped and maintaining muscle mass. On a final note…is there anyone out there who has had good results (fat loss and maintenance of muscle mass) using the Eat Right For Your Type Diet who wasn’t a type O eating a lot of protein and unprocessed carbs? I doubt it.
Enough of this shit already…Boog, if I ate nothing but meat, eggs, vegetables, and fruit as you indicated is you basic plan (from a post below) I would be as shredded as Kraft Cheese. Maybe people need a plan to follow and have to be told what to eat. There is far better science behind the Atkins diet than Eat Right For Your Blood Type. Whenever you are conscious of what and how much you eat, you will lose weight unless you have some metabolic abnormality. Give me a list of foods I absolutely should avoid (I already said that I eat a shitload of oatmeal and cottage and drink plenty of diet coke - all of which O’s aren’t supposed to do and guess what, I feel fantastic on them)…I could lose weight and feel better on type of restricted food plan. If it’s natural and isn’t processed, G-d Almighty designed us to handle it! Maybe not everyone’s gastrointestinal tract or metabolism can handle this since there are exceptions, but I’ll bet 95% of the population are just like me. Perhaps this is a very good diet for a miniscule portion of the population that has such difficulties, but anyone can lose weight and feel great on Carb Addict’s Diet, Sugar Busters, Atkin’s (well you might not feel great but you’ll lose fat), Protein Power, etc. Don’t mean to bash it, but I hare when people tell me I should use the Cabbage diet because it worked so well for them.
Alrighty… well lets get a little into this science… natural science, the science we are familiar with, is baffled when it comes to, say, studying the science of the ancient Egyptians. Similarly, an ancient Egyptian would meet the science of today, natural science, with the same lack of understanding. To the Egyptian, what our physicists these days call “force” was totally instinctive to them. They were complete masters of it. What Goethean science attempts to do is connect these two sciences, resulting in a synergistic combination that will elevate science to unfathomable heights. Anyone who is well-versed with the current quantam physics movement, knows of sciences’ attempt for a unified field theory… basically a theory of everything. This reminds me of a tale about a scientist, who is on the brink of a major discovery. Its as though he was climbing a mountain, laboring day and night to make a great discovery. He finally reaches the top of the mountain, and like a bad dream, realizes that he’s not the first one to make this discovery. There is a group of theologians who have been sitting on the top of this mountain for centuries…
Goethean science is a science of “manifest secrets”… that is a world behind the world of our everyday senses. For example, say that there was someone who came into a peaceful discussion and started saying things like “you are all fucking morons… your ideas are only worthy of contempt and scorn… oh, would you like to smell your own shit? I’d be happy to rub it in your faces!” Then, let’s say that we politely tell him to leave, as we don’t like talking to a person with a penis so small that it could pick a lock. He responds, “yeah, the locks of the Panama Canal, maybe!”… what truth do we see, lying behind such an individual’s big words? We see reality for what it really is: He is a miserable person. He feels inferior about his status in life. He thought everyone discovered his deepest secret whenever the remark was made about his micro-penis, so he grossly overexaggerates about it, thinking that this will compensate for what nature gave him (or forgot to)… This would be an example of “manifest secrets.” An expert at Goethean science thinks very similarly to a Sherlock Holmes or a Hannibal Lecter. They are able to spot things that others cannot see. Just because someone cannot see such things, does not mean that such things don’t exist… it only means that the said individual cannot see them. It has been said that this science is nothing but “mythology”… Simply not true. Goethean science is, quite simply, a different way of thinking… a different way of percieving the world. The methods of it really aren’t much different than those “magic eyes” posters… where you can make out an image from, what initially appears to be a “modern art.” But, once seen, the image becomes clear as day… well, thats all for now… I’ll be back on the board tomorrow to continue… Till then…
Man, that was hilarious. I wonder if Mike the Libertarian will respond now. If he does, this thing will go on forever. Haha
I only respond to claims of science. Booga here has gone far beyond science and into Aristotelian speculation. Up next: How the Laws of Logic Prove You Should Eat Right for Your Type.
Stark raving mad…
ya know, i’m no closer to knowing if this diet will or will not work for the reasons that are mentioned.
i’ve got to lean with mike the librarian because although i didn’t understand all the big hi tech mumbo jumbo, i understood it better than booga’s hi tech mumbo jumbo.
booga’ reminded me of don king meets dexter’s labratory.
alotta words but nothing said, only hi tech.
Hey BoogaBrain, you were giving me a brain cramp, so I smoked some hooch and I think I understand you. Basically, if I’m interpreting you correctly, you are saying that sometimes we must reply on intuition. Yes, it is true that many great scientific discoveries have been made when a scientist tested out a hunch. But in every single case, a verifiable experiment was conducted. Our intuition can be very misleading sometimes. For example, we all “knew” that heavier objects fall faster than light ones. This had been “instinctively” known for as long as mankind has been around. It was only when Galileo put this well accepted assumption to the test was it proven to be false. Perhaps he had that extra sense that you speak of that made him test that theory, but the fact remain that he tested it. I know of no studies showing that blood type determines dietary destiny. This is as bogus as blood typing to determine compatibility that was popular with Japanese teenaged girls a few years ago. I will bet you that most people who claim to have success with this diet will be type O’s who are looking to lose weight. In other words, people who follow a diet that bears close resemblance to other low/moderate carb diets. I will venture to say that other blood types will not do so well because they will be following a diet more resembling the old low fat, high regardless-of-GI-carb diet. What would that mean? That blood type don’t mean a thang.
Racer-
I’m glad to see that there are people that think like I do on this forum… and I’ve read some Levinas. He says some really enlightening things on the Torah. Oh, did you find the list? Sorry I had to give it to you in code, but we’re not able to list websites on the 'ol forum, as you well know…
Lets delve a bit more into this science… Today I’ll get into a few fundamental concepts that, I hope, will revolutionize the way we think about gaining muscle, losing fat, etc. I think that this is a first for any of these concepts to be introduced into the bodybuilding community…And I would like to apologize that this seems so boring. But I promise that if you bear with, you’ll be rewarded with a new way of thinking about Ok here we go… first we have what we call the mineral, or physical body. These are indeed the minerals in the Earth. Next, we have what is called the etheric body. The etheric body is exemplified in the plant kingdom. It is what seperates that which is living from dead, lifeless matter. Next, we have the astral body… the seat of pleasure and pain. All sensations are due to the astral body… Astral bodies can be found in the animal kingdom, but not the plant because plants have no feelings. (fruititarians…I call 'em fruits for short…, would object to such a statement)These three bodies relate within man in a remarkable way. Lets imagine a clock. The second hand would be represented by the astral body, the minute by the etheric, and the physical by the hour hand. Like an obese individual, their astral body wants immediate pleasure. So they satiate it by eating ice cream… Slowly the etheric body, which contains one’s tendencies, becomes affected. Deep cravings for ice cream develop. Then finally, the physical body is affected for the worse. Ok then… tomorrow we’ll talk about how this stuff relates to blood type, then in light of these concepts, I’ll give some scientific data which will not prove the ER4YT diet, but will prove to a degree the blood type-diet connection…
Hmmm… thats certainly interesting. This concept gives a whole new meaning to “getting to the root of the problem.” I’m looking fwd to the next installment.
I am blood type B. I think I’m supposed to drink alot of milk and eat a bunch of yogart and meat because this is what my ancestors did. Somebody said that this diet only works for type o’s but the type b diet is bodybuilding as well. I think that the only bodybuilders that wouldn’t do well on the blood type diet is type A’s. Fell sorry for them. hehe
okey dokey… Now how do these bodies relate to b.t.? Our circulatory systems are manifestations of the etheric body. This can be observed as the fundamental difference between plant and mineral-- plants have xylem and phloem… the veins and the arteries of the plant world. Now, etheric bodies are transmitted from one generation to the next. If one were to change their etheric body, like in the aformentioned example of the ice cream lovin’ fatty, then that damage does manifest itself in the next generations. Here’s an example… Weimaraners were bred in 19th century Germany. They were trained to kill deer by sneaking up from behind them and biting off their nutsacks. (hurts just thinking about it, I know) Remember, originally these dogs did not, by instinct, rip off testicles… they had to be trained to do so. Today, if you have a pet Weimaraner and put it in the same situation, it will rip off the deer’s nuts. Why? A deep seeded change has occured within the makeup of the breed. Its etheric body has transformed and is manifested in later generations. This phenomenon explains some individuals’ predispositions towards alcoholism, homosexuality, etc… Damage has been done to the etheric body by the individuals ancestors. Alcoholism is indeed “in one’s blood”. Now, I think we see how diet relates to blood. If one’s ancestors ate particular foods, there was an etheric change. And, of course, it is much more complex than simple blood-type as there has been alot of mixing in recent generations (especially amongst Americans) But blood type, I believe, is a good place to start. I believe that a much better diet would be Eat Right for Your Genetics, or something similar.
Interesting. Do different foods have an effect on the etheric body? What about roids? This is some very different info you’re giving us, man. I’d like it if you talked some more about this stuff.
Booga, may I suggest a good genetics/evolutionary theory textbook for your reading pleasure? Your thoughts on organism adaptation pre-dates Darwin circa 19th C. Adaptation occurs through random genetic mutation that happens to increase the survival of a species. Altered behaviour can not influence our genes.
Brian- Darwin’s theory of evolution has many problems. There is the philosophical problem of the tautology of this theory. That is, Darwinism makes a statement true by its definition i.e. “the survivors survive.” In Darwinism, which stated the survival of the fittest, what is fit to survive? Well, what survives is fit. And we say that random mutation occurs whenever there is no real explaination for it. So you see, Darwinism dos not even pass its own materialistic methods of proof. Now don’t get me wrong… I am by no means a “creation scientist”… I just believe that all evolution is a result of the will, not random chance. As a bodybuilder can I sit around on my ass waiting to get big muscles and a ripped physique?
Jeff- I’ll be more than happy to talk about the effects of various foods on the etheric body when I have more time. I’m just a bit too busy with spring break and all. Later
The mutation of the organism aids survival if it allows them to be more compatitble with their environment i.e. increased ability to find food and/or flee predators. May I suggest a good book on the topic “The Selfish Gene” by Richard Dawkins. It was written a few years back but is a great book for summarizing modern evolutionary theory with only a few minor changes occuring since then. Spontaneos mutations can occur from a variety of sources, including errors in DNA replication, spontaneous lesions, and transposable genetic elements (1). Their influences on DNA has been widely supported in the last 40 years in genetic research. May this be a help to all those people wasting endless hours stretching their dicks in hopes of better endowed progeny. 
References: (1) "An Introduction to Genetic Analysis" 6th ed., A. Griffiths, J. Miller, D. Suzuki, R. Lewontin, W. Gelbart., 1996, Freeman and Company, p. 586.
Brian- Actually, I’m very familiar with Dawkins. There was an article by him in “Nature” (vol.368, April 21, 1994, pp.690-1) where he reports a cpu experiment on the evolution of the shape of the eye. The eye in the cpu program started at a light sensitive disk and only evolved at 1 percent changes in the shape in random directions in any one step and accepted only steps that increased refractive index. There were about 300 steps total. In real time, Dawkins calculated that these 300 steps would require 400,000 years. Dawkins came up with this experiment to illustrate random mutation, and on the surface he does. But he actually illustrates my evolutionary theory. What Dawkins shows is that when there is present in the consciousness of a living being which can take advantage of an organ of a particular type, random variation and selection for improvement can fairly quickly produce it. In this case, the consciousness was that of the experimenter who supplied the formula for the refractive index and the rule to accept only steps that improved it. What Dawkins wants to argue is that no will, no “spiritual” being is necessary. What his experiment shows, however, is the opposite.
Jeff- I haven’t forgot about you yet, bro… I’ll get to your q’ in a few days… I’m still thinking about your question on 'roids… that’s a tricky one. Later