Wow did you even read all the articles you posted? I did, and they don't really even seem to conclude what you want them to. The first article even says "Protein requires insulin for metabolism, as do carbohydrate and fat, but has minimal effects on blood glucose levels."

The second link is based on food questionnaires... I'm sure you know the issue with that.

The third article doesn't support your point: "There might have been other differences in diet, suggests Presley, such as sugar intake, which could increase the risk of metabolic syndrome due to its effects on insulin.
In short, says Presley, “This study leaves a lot of unanswered questions and does not provide enough meaningful data to come to any conclusions such as the one the researches came to.”"

The fourth article talks about energy consumption of factory farming which they somehow equate with meat eating. Doesn't even mention the alternative practice of raising your own meat, hunting locally or buying from a local farm - all of which are feasible unless confined to an inner city setting. This article in particular is oozing with vegan propaganda slime. I love this statement near the end: "The adverse effects of dietary animal fat intake on cardiovascular diseases is by now well established. Similar effects are also seen when meat, rather than fat, intake is considered," Martin and Eshel wrote. "To our knowledge, there is currently no credible evidence that plant-based diets actually undermine health; the balance of available evidence suggests that plant-based diets are at the very least just as safe as mixed ones, and most likely safer." - None of that is true, "plant based diets"(i.e. vegan) are notoriously deficient in Iron, particular amino acids, B12, and n-3 (EPA, DHA). http://www.kitchentablem...ns-should-watch-out-for/

The fifth link is about some of the opinions of T. Colin Campbell (the biggest cherry picking vegan scumbag out there). It goes on to say that protein rich diets cause bone mineral loss. It does not account for any other factors involved in calcium regulation in the body (Vit D, hormone levels, Magnesium/Calicum intake ratio). This is simply the worst kind propaganda, where no adequate testing is done and firm conclusions are drawn anyways. Bad Science!! Look at this abstract showing that in epidemiological observations, the opposite conclusion can be made. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16373952

Face it bud, the "evidence" you provided is not evidence at all and makes you look quite foolish for justifying your diet on such bad science. The repeated "meat is bad, whole grains are good" motto that you hear from the government and news sources is that way for a reason. This type of food is highly profitable and is even subsidized by the government. This is because politicians are in the pocket of big agriculture. These "healthful recommendations" are either based on epidemiological studies (correlation does not imply causation) or studies where the "high fat" or "high protein" diet was composed of terrible food choices. We need cross-over studies that compare true vegan diets to true SAD to true Paleo diets, this is the only way we will ever get closer to the truth. Fortunately, due to the work of folks like Robb Wolf, Mat Lalonde, Loren Cordain and Gary Taubes, these studies might happen in the not-so-distant future.

I've done you the favor of reading through all those links you posted. Now please read through mine:

http://www.nytimes.com/2...ar-t.html?pagewanted=all - might want to cut back on that fruit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM - here is the video referenced in the Times article. Long, but worth watching.

http://crossfitbirmingha...5%3AUploadedFi58%3A26057 - Please read through this debate between Cordain and Campbell. I'm sure after reading it, you will see which is the real rigorous scientist interested in the truth and which is the bigot.

I know these readings are rather long and detailed, especially if you don't have a background in science, but if you want to get closer to nutritional truths these are good places to start. Good luck!

"If you wanted to truly get a grasp on diet's effect on this condition within your body you would have to run a controlled experiment on yourself where you controlled all other variables (exercise, sleep time, drug intake, etc.) and then switch to a couple of different diets for an extended period of time."

If you knew anything about me or my posts on this site(and probly even in this thread) you would know that I have done that. I have tried many diets that many doctors put me on when I was too sick to even work. I have had full blood work done before and after different diets. I am not just sitting here making a bunch of BS up.

I dont really know why you are laughting about fats inside of cells blocking the efficacy of insulin. This is well understood. Nowhere have I said that fats are bad or that people do not need to eat them. Stop making it out as if I am saying something I am not. I dont put words into your mouth. Please stop putting words into mine.

"Before insulin can do its job of driving sugar into cells, it must first attach on special hooks on cells called insulin receptors. Fat inside cells blocks insulin receptors. Muscle cells full of fat cannot respond to insulin and the sugar remains in the bloodstream. Full fat cells send out hormones that block insulin receptors to prevent insulin from clearing sugar from the bloodstream"

http://drpinna.com/dr-mi...-to-avoid-diabetes-17971

If you also did the reasearch you apparently do, than you would understand that most credible people do not claim that any and all sugars cause this condition..it is SIMPLE sugars-refined sugars and carbohydrates..fruits contain tons of carbs but not all simple carbohydrated. You origionally said all sugars and carbs cause diabetes.

You continue to ask me for some evidence and I post at least SOMETHING..yet you have posted NOTHING to support anything you are claiming.

http://www.examiner.com/...iabetes-debates-continue

"To solve the debate between nutritionists and other health care professionals, research at Yale that continues from a 2004 starting date noted that insulin resistance is connected to the accumulation of fat droplets inside your muscle cells. The fat droplets are microscopic, but they still block the process of how insulin is managed. The fat in muscles cells accumulates and intereferes with insulin's action."

especially read this one from a peer reviewed journal because it is obvious that it implicates the idea that high fat diets can be associated with insulin resistance..

http://www.plosone.org/a...1%2Fjournal.pone.0028784

Sure, I didn't mean to imply that it's the only method of restoring health to ravaged land, but I do mean to imply that it is one option that can also provide plenty of healthy food for the surrounding population. Grains can probably be grown sustainably if done in the proper manner, I'm not sure I don't know much about this. I just know that the processes used now by big agriculture business are terrible for the environment and terrible for the people. I don't really have interest in this idea anyways, because of the health effects of grains. IMO since agriculture was implemented around 10K years ago, things have gone downhill for humanity ever since. Instead of sending grains to third world countries, which causes them to get "wheat bellies" and become emancipated, why don't we help these people raise livestock in sustainable ways and grow fresh vegetables using the manure for nutrients? The reason is because this wouldn't benefit the U.S. agriculture business.

I think your point is valid about not falling for any propaganda, but I think you are not giving proper weight to the amounts of propaganda coming from each side. How often do you see a commercial or a news report that shows meat in a positive light?

You've completely switched what you said about fats. You said that fats bind to insulin, implying that dietary fat floats around your blood stream any binds to insulin... now you switch to talking about fat in adipose tissue causing insulin resistance. Obviously this is the case, but the whole point of this debate is how the fat accumulates. If you are implying that the fat that you store in your gut that contributes to insulin resistance is associated with dietary fat then you are running circles around yourself and not providing any proper evidence. I just posted links to what I feel is good evidence against a high carb diet. I hope you take your vegan blinders off and actually listen and think critically with an open mind. By the way, that last study you posted used SOYBEAN oil, not animal fat... so once again you have failed to provide evidence supporting your claims.

man, I never said a goddamn thing about animal fat? Where is that I said this was about animal fat? Can you please point out where in any of my posts I said this was about animal fat? Are you again putting words into my mouth?

Sorry I dont own "vegan blinders"..this is also not really a great way to address people in discuess here. We have an attitude policy, you might want to go read it again.

Obviously a higher fat diet is going to accumulate more fat inside of cells. I dont really understand what it is about that that you dont understand?

I wont have this discussion with people who seem to have some sort of personal issue with the whole thing to the point where there anti vegan agenda forces them to belittle people in discussions like this.

Have fun with your negative belittling attitue there bud. Hope it gets you everything you want in life.

Also Polysaccharides are broken down into monosaccharides and are processed by the liver. The most common dietary disaccharide is sucrose. This molecule is composed of one glucose and one fructose. The fructose (present in high amounts in some fruits) is very problematic for your liver. The difference between the fructose in a can of Coke and fructose in the Apples you eat.... None. Same exact molecule, same processing by your body. Please don't listen to doctors that only listen to the recommendations of AHA, Dietetic Association, USDA, etc. These organizations make unsubstantiated claims that can be detrimental to your health.

By the way, you say I put words in your mouth, specifically about the saturated fat being implicated in disease, but that's exactly what some of the links you posted claimed... so don't link to "evidence" that you don't even agree with yourself. You contradict yourself more than Mitt Romney.

http://www.sciencedaily....2006/04/060414012755.htm This is the link you posted before to support your argument. Notice that it implicated animal fat, therefore I am not putting words into your mouth.. you used this article to support your opinion.

"Obviously a higher fat diet is going to accumulate more fat inside of cells. I dont really understand what it is about that that you dont understand?" - What is obvious about this? How come in studies, low carb high fat diets have caused fat loss even when not being calorie deficient? Equating dietary fat with body fat is like equating brain size with dietary brain intake. Do you think that this stuff goes from your gut to your adipose tissue?? Because that simply is not how the body works, fat molecules are processed by the body just like protein and carbs are. It's a much more complex system then you are making it out to be. I'm no trying to belittle you, but the type of oversimplifying and baseless dietary recommendations providing people is not constructive. I would really appreciate it if you looked at some of the links I posted as I did look thoroughly through the ones you posted (and debunked them as well). I would be overcome with joy, if you could find evidence against a high fat, moderate protein, low carb diet for health. One the is devoid of neolithic foods like grains, legumes, dairy, and processed foods and high in leafy greens, fatty meats, fish with low amounts of fruit and tubers. If you can show me that this diet is less healthy then your type of diet, then I will switch to your type of diet. If you cannot refute my links or statements, then if looks like my evidence is superior to yours. This isn't about belittlement, it's about debate and getting to the truth regarding nutrition. Please look through the things I've posted and counter my arguments with solid evidence if you feel necessary.

Since you have not refuted anything I've said or linked, I assume this means that you concede. One should not be so quick to assume that one knows the biochemistry, when he/she clearly only obtains his/her info from biased cherry-picked studies. I hope that next time, before you make a statement claiming that something is "obvious" or "true", that you get your facts straight and do adequate research. That or leave the discussion to the ones who have studied this stuff in depth.

Saturated fat isn't bad for you.

There are plenty of documented reports that prove the opposite, in fact.

The documentary 'Fathead' demonstrates that a high protein/high fat, low carb/sugar diet can reduce weight, cholesterol, triglycerides and blood pressure. It also improves one's mood, too.

http://www.fathead-movie...php/recommended-reading/


And here's a 365-day paleo blog also demonstrating the same thing. He reversed his pre-diabetic condition and greatly improved his health overall.

http://paleoeater.blogspot.com/

I'd be interested in seeing that movie as it does seem to implicate the real cause of metabolic syndrome, carbohydrates. But judging from one of those videos on that site, it seems like he might be advocating fast food as a healthy choice. I disagree with this, even that hamburger he's eating is loaded with HFCS, not to mention all of the additives in the mean and condiments. Eating real food is a much better solution, though if I had to choose between fries and a hamburger at mcdonalds, I would certainly choose the burger.

sustainability: http://www.slate.com/art..._eating_meat_video_.html

Just wanted to know what kind of diet you are on. Are you a vegitarian of meat eater? Tell us! Spread your wisdom too on what you think.

I know we have talked about this in other forums, but not a poll.

I voted I'd like to become a vegetarian one day.

I enjoy eating meat and have recently decided that the only meat I eat will be free range and organic as I transition to a vegetarian diet. If I continue to eat meat long term, I'd really prefer that it was meat that I raised myself, so I know it got plenty of love and nothing but goodness throughout it's life.

I feel that by ingesting animals, you are also ingesting their experience and general life field. If it was a dark and murky life, how is that going to affect me? It seems that eating happy, healthy animals would be more beneficial than eating tortured, depressed animals.

Theres been quite a few threads on this topic. If you do a search i'm sure you'll find loads of interesting info

I went from eating a plethora of fast food, junk food, meat, etc etc, almost everyday--to only eating mainly uncooked plants/fruit/nuts and things of that sort.. I feel a billion times better than i did before and have tons of energy. After i adjusted and learned ways to make what i wanted to eat taste great i ended up loving the food i eat now far more than anything i used to eat previously.. its just so much more fulfilling, rich, and alive feeling.. on a level that isn't even comparable to my old diet

this research is mainly why i made the transition. the forward by McKenna explains the theory in a vague nutshell

left in the dark

interview/article on the idea

But even if this proposal wasn't true, i would continue to eat this way. Since how i feel now and how its even impacted other aspects of my life, such as my psychedelic experiences, is enough for me to have no doubts in choosing to stick with it. I guess i could put vegan on the pole, although i consume some animal products like honey so..

I eat bee honey.

That is all.

In your list of choices you forgot one important one: "I was not raised vegetarian but adopted the diet at one point and have stuck with it ever since." and of course you'd need a vegan version of this.

For me: 20 years, no meat, no regrets. And I'm 44 and thin. Probably did help...

My reasons are personal. It's a form of nonviolence, a form of environmentalism, a political statement and a health choice, all wrapped into one.

I DO NOT judge meat eaters, and really don't care what you eat or why, so please don't waste time getting defensive or telling me my skeleton will collapse, or whatever. That thread has already happened and doesnt need a repeat.

I believe that our dietary choices are, among other things, a form of personal expression, so when you find something that works for you as an individual, how can I judge you for that? I'm saying this because this is a subject that seems a little divisive, and IMO there is no reason for that.

I didn't know you could survive on bee honey alone. You must be really sweet.

And I have been a vegetarian for three or four years now(which wasn't an option in the poll, so I didn't place a vote).

EDIT: And here's a pretty recent thread about the same thing with some very thorough discussions: https://www.dmt-nexus.me...aspx?g=posts&t=28659

The question seems to be setting up vegetarian and meat eater as opposites which suggests that the meat eater eats nothing but meat. A better option in the poll would be do you eat a mixed diet of meat and vegetables, which I would suggest most 'meat eaters' would.

I eat both meat and vegetables.