Originally posted by Felch
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Let's have mechanically separated chicken for dinner tonight.
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by The Mad Monk View PostLogic says that 200,000 years ago evolution had not yet adapted us to cooked foods, yet cooking added such an advantage that we never stopped.
Until hippies showed up and declared it "un-natural".
2) As I said, it is very likely that most new chemicals are harmless; we simply lack the research, most importantly, about the wealth of possible combinations.
3) People should be free to eat whatever they want, as long as food is labeled.In Soviet Russia, Fake borises YOU.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Oncle Boris View PostSignificant difference in health levels.No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Mad Monk View PostIt was significant. Current theory suggests that cooking gave us such a boost that we stopping mucking about with basic stone axes and got on with jewelry, language and evything that followed.
Thanks.
And come back with your evidence that pink slime is a major contributor to the cause of civilization.In Soviet Russia, Fake borises YOU.
Comment
-
Here are two studies that indicate raw food has dangers.
Dental erosions in subjects living on a raw food diet.
[T]he results showed that a raw food diet bears an increased risk of dental erosion compared to conventional nutrition.
Consequences of a long-term raw food diet on body weight and menstruation: results of a questionnaire survey.
The consumption of a raw food diet is associated with a high loss of body weight. Since many raw food dieters exhibited underweight and amenorrhea, a very strict raw food diet cannot be recommended on a long-term basis.John Brown did nothing wrong.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Oncle Boris View Post3) People should be free to eat whatever they want, as long as food is labeled.
Remember that if we go for option 1, we're going to have to start performing mass spectrometry on all our foods, because it's essentially guaranteed that there are very, very dangerous trace elements in everything humans touch.Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
"We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La Rochefoucauld
Comment
-
Originally posted by kentonio View PostVery few Americans eat a balanced diet but we shouldn't blame the bad stuff they eat that just happens to be generally far cheaper than healthy alternatives, far more convenient and is mass marketed on TV's, billboards and radio across the country 24/7?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Oncle Boris View PostSo you admit that rule #5 (exception for cooked food) is logical?
Thanks.
And come back with your evidence that pink slime is a major contributor to the cause of civilization.No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Felch View PostHere are two studies that indicate raw food has dangers.
Dental erosions in subjects living on a raw food diet.
[T]he results showed that a raw food diet bears an increased risk of dental erosion compared to conventional nutrition.
Consequences of a long-term raw food diet on body weight and menstruation: results of a questionnaire survey.
The consumption of a raw food diet is associated with a high loss of body weight. Since many raw food dieters exhibited underweight and amenorrhea, a very strict raw food diet cannot be recommended on a long-term basis.
The flaw with many studies about diets is that they study "de facto" how people who claim to have the diet manage it, not how it could possibly be done.In Soviet Russia, Fake borises YOU.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Oncle Boris View PostYes, you lost, the only thing left for you is to nitpick over side-issues for which I have the honesty to admit I don't know much.Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
"We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La Rochefoucauld
Comment
-
Originally posted by kentonio View PostVery few Americans eat a balanced diet but we shouldn't blame the bad stuff they eat that just happens to be generally far cheaper than healthy alternatives, far more convenient and is mass marketed on TV's, billboards and radio across the country 24/7?
Originally posted by Oncle Boris View PostSo you admit that rule #5 (exception for cooked food) is logical?
Thanks.John Brown did nothing wrong.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Oncle Boris View PostThe flaw with many studies about diets is that they study "de facto" how people who claim to have the diet manage it, not how it could possibly be done.John Brown did nothing wrong.
Comment
Comment