(January 9, 2013 at 4:15 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I would hope so, but your eyes aren't exactly instruments designed to pierce the veil of human nutritional requirements or health, rgr?

If you recommend health and nutrition to people on the internet, it's only fair that you get scrutinized based on your results.

I won't hear any more from you on this.

Which would have nothing to do with -your- eyes, except to say that they are incapable of determining said results.

Put it this way, I could say that you looked like a frail nancy boy. It wouldn't matter whether or not that was your actual picture, because even if it was, my perceiving you as a shadow of an actual male (if I stood at an oblique angle to the sun in a field on a cloudy day and looked at the ground behind and beneath me, I'd see your avatar - and I could actually use a few extra pounds) isn't really a valid criticism of whatever joke-diet you don't follow. It just means that to me- people who look like your avatar- look like they break in half when a strong wind blows. In the same way, to you, people who look like Tara are "overweight". Your eyes aren't actually capable of checking bmi, any more than mine can detect "manliness".

(January 9, 2013 at 4:06 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Animal protein is healthy, some if it is "healthier" or "less healthy" but to use words like "need" we have to put a bunch of qualifiers. You can survive for quite some time on cardboard, sugar packets, and water, for example, but no one would say that all you "need" is cardboard, sugar and water. The "need" bit comes from whatever a researcher or proponent has defined as the "optimal level" of this or that....which is why the numbers can vary so greatly from source to source without anyone actually looking to out-and-ought misinform anyone.

This is very true. You can go without quite a few things and still survive for a while, but eventually a shortage in protein or other nutrients will catch up with you. And, yes, just like in every other science, the stats can be fudged by biases of the researcher doing the research. This is why I rely on information published specifically on the governments' webside; they don't seem to have much of an agenda past our own health and well being and most of these studies have been through the peer review process. That doesn't mean that the information is going to be unquestionably right, but that it's less likely to be way out in left field wrong.

But, hey, if ol' Chuckie here can find any published studies from the last 5 years that support his claim that there's protein in everything or that you can get by with trace amounts of protein, I'll go with that. As it is, his body probably isn't going to last too long before he starts to suffer from the effects of protein deficiency. There are a lot of amino acids that your body can't produce without protein and when your body has to do without them, it isn't pretty.

Well, there is no medical word for 'protein deficiency' since it is so rare- the only things close to protein deficiency go hand in hand with calorie deficiency and cell mutations such as cancer.

Have you ever heard of anyone dying of protein deficiency?

Again, answer my question- why would I take advice from you when you look fat?

(January 9, 2013 at 4:23 pm)TaraJo Wrote: This is very true. You can go without quite a few things and still survive for a while, but eventually a shortage in protein or other nutrients will catch up with you. And, yes, just like in every other science, the stats can be fudged by biases of the researcher doing the research. This is why I rely on information published specifically on the governments' webside; they don't seem to have much of an agenda past our own health and well being and most of these studies have been through the peer review process. That doesn't mean that the information is going to be unquestionably right, but that it's less likely to be way out in left field wrong.

Just as a side note, and not that I would worry...but...there -is- an agenda. Ag lobbies aren't exactly un-involved in the process, and their interests do get included. Like you said, not unquestionably right, but not likely to be far left field wrong in aggregate.

Theories are weighed precisely by their results. A 400 pound man with a high level degree in nutritional science is going to give you better dietary advice than a 85lb bulimic teen....sigh

(January 9, 2013 at 5:35 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Theories are weighed precisely by their results. A 400 pound man with a high level degree in nutritional science is going to give you better dietary advice than a 85lb bulimic teen....sigh

I told you I care about what people do, not what they say. Since if you are not following your own advice, I can not take someone seriously.

Here's what I looked like when I was doing more heavy lifting/basketball:



This was still 5-10% protein, and 80% carbs.

So, I have proven myself both in getting a lean/mean long distance runner body, and being efficient at sports that require higher muscle. I have proven that my diet works, and that I can follow it. In nature, the one who is the alpha male is the one that eats first, eats the most- I need the carbs, it's a war out there, I need all the energy I can get.