« The Joe Rogan Experience

#1393 - James Wilks & Chris Kresser - The Game Changers Debate

2019-12-05 | 🔗
James Wilks is a retired mixed martial artist. He was the winner of Spike TV's The Ultimate Fighter: United States vs. United Kingdom. He is also a producer of the documentary "The Game Changers" on Netflix. Chris Kresser, M.S., L.Ac is a globally recognized leader in the fields of ancestral health, Paleo nutrition, and functional and integrative medicine. Link to notes from this podcast by Chris Kresser: http://kresser.co/gamechangers
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Hello friends. This episode, the podcast brought you buy brave brave, is the web browser re imagined. Keeping your purse information, private. As you surf the web, we were living in a surveillance economy. Every time you downloaded page or not just downloading. The content, like the Texan images, also downloading privacy invading trackers and many popular media sites have over a hundred track. On every page you being profiled interact across and so were well. It can find they can find out. So much about you you're. Furred sexual orientation, political views, religious beliefs, what kind of man of late She might have includes what Jerry What you watch, what you listening to include you location, sometimes right up to the exact GPS coordinates, but as a way to protect yourself and remove the surveillance economy. To start using brave, brave stops, data grab
trackers and creepy ads from following you o clock across the web. You to browse up to six times faster than with other browsers, because none of that bullshit running so stop allowing the surveillance economy to take advantage of you. Listeners of this pod cast had over get brave today. It's easy import. Your bookmarks with some chrome, you just do! One click and less than sixty seconds you'll be enjoying a better internet it's free and all your chrome extensions work in brave so head over the brave dot com, Slash, Rogan and switch now, that's brave dot com, Slash Rogan to switch now switch to brave this want yesterday was about big tech. Today's about US affiliates. I should read that, unlike us, happy boyfriend, but its adult browser
it's great idea: we are also brought o c b, the M d, but they have great shit. They have great CD oils They have gone ease of you're in a and and top for, like if you have a muscle, pain shit like that and they also the thing called CD p M and helps you on wind. After, a long day, relax blends five hundred milligrams of high quality, c b d, with melatonin valerian route, camera meal and other sleep. Promoting ingredients even spelled out, can mimic the phonetic cam meal. That's a simple one If someone does no camels, do you really want them selling you see, beating I'm a colonial snob Benny Way it helps you.
And to make it even easier for you to try CD, p m or any of c b d, empties premium cd oil products, and I can't say enough how much I enjoy them. I love C b d. I think it is so important for health. I think it's great for alleviation of anxiety, it's great for sore joints. It's just Really nice inflammation, reducing product that a lot of people with our arthritis have found some real relief, including by my good friend Day Foley from news radio. He told me that his hands got way better after you started taking regular cd. While I think he takes a hundred Milligrams day anyway to make it
here for you to try CD, p m or any of c b d m. These premiums c b the oil products are offering listeners as pod cast twenty percent off your next order when you use a promo code, Rogan at check out so that c, b, D, M d, dot com and use a promo code Rogan for twenty percent off your purchase of high quality C b. Do all. I can say that C b, the oil products from C B, the empty c b d, M d- don't worry, about it, that's their thing as today's that's their there. Everyone has a catchphrase Helen for people, make a fake catchphrase just to see if say it, and they get really stoop. They probably trolling me already turned on we are also brought to you by the mother fucking. Cash out the Gaza make. This add for sure. Troll me because it says in their the mother fucking cash app.
The one off I'll say it even add other things that I say Calloway It will gain we play. I love this company. And one things I love, but this company is there there not just an excellent application. The number one up in finance in the app store for reason, great it allows you to buy, sell bitcoin can send money back and forth of your friends, and you can also by stock with it. Ash ab investing is in no way and, unlike other bitch ass, investing tool, the only what you buy entire shares of stock cash, app, we'll let you instantly start investing his little or as much as you walk so cause. Some stocks could cost hundreds of dollars, if not thousands per share, but now you could ill own a piece of stock with as little as one dollar stock. Investing is now so easy that I could do it can
it is also the easiest way if you to buy Bitcoin, so what the fuck you any for brokerage services are provided by cash app and sting, a subsidiary of square and a member of S ipc? Now here's? Where would I love the most about the company when you download the cash app and enter the referral code. Joe Rogan, all one word jargon spelt altogether the cash. We'll send ten hours to my good friend, Justin Rennes fight for the forgotten charity can making wells for the pygmies in the Congo. It's a beautiful thing, and on top of that, you will also receive tender heart. You can go wrong. You folks, So don't forget promo code, Joe Rogan, when you download the cash out from the app store or the Google play store today. The podcast today is between James Works he's one of the producers of the games dangers and Chris Crasser who deal
the game changes in the last podcast that I had with him. I'd known James, Wilkes from the ultimate fighter and from the? U have sea have a great deal of respect for him as a Marshall artist, and although we don't agree on everything we found out through the podcast that we agree on a lot, and there is a lot that I learned. Men so that I had held preconceived ideas of what what is true about the the science of nutrition and like James, super prepared. I mean I don't want to spoil or too much, but he made some very, very good points out. Anyone say what we all do agreed on, but it was way less than you would think, is a great guy, and I want to thank Criss cross her for doing this as well, because you know it These. Are heart disease not conduct relations are costly to to brain, but
I think we got a lot of this and I know I certainly did. I appreciate them both very much. Please welcome James Works and Chris Crasser Logan experience you block ass. You go first of all welcome James, religion have male my pleasure and now welcome again Chris. So this is essentially giving you, opportunity to refute some things that Chris said about your film. We should tell her body that you are you the producer of game, changer cells, one of I'm one of tuna to choose rail users, I know you also from of course, from the ultimate fighter. You have see an christmases, your what fourth appearance or third, fourth or fifth Did you get a chance to see what Chris said? Yeah I've watched you wash ok right, a bunch of notes, actual let's do from the beginning
beginning of the show. The beginning, we film you talked about the gladiators and all that stuff and the fact that you were shocked to find out the day they had eaten a vegetarian diet. Allow us spend misrepresented rights, even before the film came out. People like all does is vague and film coming out speaking propaganda. People were judging the found before that scene. It right and the vision sort of, I pushed it. I got to look at this documentary says mean things I think they claim that the gladiators were vegan right and if we can just prove that the whole film is based on this prime, that was just like an inciting instant from you start digging into it. First of all, fighting cancer there they were predominantly vegetarian, and I said that I mostly plants and that is why couldn't believe right now imminent claim their Regan don't even claimed a vegetarian here just feel mostly by plants, Europeans. Are you cherry pick, one location, it the only known, blooded burial site in the world based on archaeological and anthropological data at the time,
The time when you read the study decided there have been other stuff, What has been has meant that some have been questions like this one in New York and there's one in New York at the time had a few glided skeletons. I question whether that was the thing, but I'm happy to address every critique wouldn't mind? I just want to make sure that Chris around the same page about how evidence is evaluated to a certain person, would you consider yourself a nutrition expert know I would consider myself someone who is adapted reading the literature and learning from experts in nutrition, medicine, anthropologie etc. Although I do have master, we have all training in nutrition, so it is fair to say that any one study cannot share what near the human rights should be added that fair anyone absolutely turbines anytime. You show us that if you say something you have to give a citation for it right, you have set aside and thence we can claim a cherry pick. Does that you ve got a shot.
Study or some studies, and then someone can claim a carpet right. So what we have to do in to understand? Nutrition is look at the totality of the evidence and autonomy children same page, and then we can address each critical, that's our goods, etc. That is the core of my argument right exactly: so you would say, is it fair to say, like the three main areas that I'd be like pre clinical data, which would either be in animals or and test tubes, Peter dishes right that be rational data, where you look at people, and see how they doing and oversee. Does the health user but healthy user, biased potential and there's interventional, try right. So let us take transplants. For example, right you, you look at introducing in the fuel cells and transports- and you can see that it creates vascular information in their cells. Right and then you look at people, eat more transports and have high levels of information, and then you can actually do interventional random, control trials, and you can tell the transports coal information, so we basically all agree the transports about based on all of those data points. Is that so
over recent years that anyone study people into someone can claim the cherry. Picking right So I am going to say that I can say that your charming use it I'm cherry picking, not necessarily because there Men, analyses and reviews fitter for this purpose. We look at the touch totality of Turning to hear in the film, for example, pointing Many men analyses that summarize all the research has been done on a topic that I wouldn't have said that that's cherry picking, colonel. I agree with that We so basically in philosophy that risk is illogical. Fallacy called appeal to authority right. But in the real world you know you have to look at exports to us She was never yields. Have I got so deserving the right time to show surgeon? I ve got a dentist that our learned about comedy all fight announcing that might come and talk to you if I want to learn about acupuncture or understand GMO. I might come to Chris because you gotta mosses masters which addressed more into medicine. Your license, acupuncture
right. So if I want to learn about that, Christy someone that I might want to go to What I'm saying is the World Health organization? The video? The American Hall Association, the turn two thousand for fifteen thousand twenty Daughtry guidelines, also nothing to eat, predominate, plant based diet right and this, a vegetarian didn't eyes a healthcare for all life stages, including for pregnancy childbirth, so through childbirth. Abreast! eating, adolescents, athletes and so on. That is that the general consensus can I just just finished, and so- and I got a bunch slides you don't believe anything. I gotta bun decide showing the position papers for all of these goods up this get through. That's about you, you'd agree that those I wouldn't know certainly agree that I must go to the limitation. So can we go to slightly Nels rights, nations change over time and other natural over time, and I would also say that I'm on a predominantly plant based diet, for example,
If you look to them, what are we argue? If you look at two thirds of my play is plants, will this ass. It does is my point yelling on your in unfair, that's really William fabulous. Last time you pointed out that the totality of coverage of the plate is not reflective of the color You said that anomaly, but let us not only to another scientist, that's all you are carries, is talking about what is predominant his die, if not unanimously plants. You got about on calories, always on that, though the. Why were we need to be encouraged if you're saying that you're die as predominate lamppost, then the one on the same page right. That's why we're not because the main question here, in my mind, is whether there is evidence that supports being on a one hundred percent plant based diet with no animal products, verses, a diet that includes a lot of plant foods and some animal foods. I thought your back in the film which was talking about plant based tyres, Sir promptly sites means giving the vast Johnny Roselli implants, one little thing or excluding out of it. You buddy
film essentially was all about own leading plants. Now but I say with his intention whatsoever and shouting animal a GMO products will kill. You, dairy products will kill. You out. Argument is like cigarettes now know that not came was never made see, but there is a connection and it was not, there was only a third connection. There was not to see what was the connection. The selections cigarettes was that the the way, the playbook that is being used by the sea, that people can fighting like what the hell play book is the same, the same way using athletes and using advertising. We never made the claim which regularly not then be clever, so the playbook that was used. By the smoking, usually so yet they pay for studies by right and we know even with food. This has been done, the cigarettes it's been done with drugs, it's been normal food research shows the industry funded studies of Fort taught forty eight times more likely to
the conclusion in their favour for their product this, what smoking industry dead, then they got doc. Does the say that smoking wasn't bad and then they got athletes to show like hey smoking. That was the power that we drew. We never drew. The power it was drawn in what the hell's ironic that really clear there was and I've seen this and in articles saying they connected meet three didn't do that and if you watch the phone We never did you. Why did you have that in their though, if you're not saying because that using the same play, but if you're not saying that meet causes cancer, you're saying where we re using this era? Labour civic claims, the chicken for eating chicken and fish causes cancer. Eating dairy causes, cancer that a report on doctors monitors and other non. That's the utmost for promoting. So can I just go back. Finish, devouring heavens, man entered each point out. Every critique, so basic the consensus and using the changing over time. They are changing because we get better signs are becoming more. The recommendation is becoming more plant based despite industry info
from studies and marketing and people being paid off in by three influence goes both ways: the sugar industry in the sixties. I agree exposition pointing the finger at fat. I agree that NATO's implies a cobra. So that does not that's Stroman argument. Germany's is not saying you are saying that a change of industry that the sugar issues, terrible, I would agree with, but can I just agreed- finish the absolutely evident book. But the thing about this, the section of the film was you were making some sort of a correlation tween cigarettes and the way that are marketed away their mark on the way and then the way meat is marketed. Correct, So this is the same companies exponent of. Why would you do if you would never do that about, like carrots or Kale Orson, his anger, predominantly health, degraded that because it and do that, if you are saying that you use of, can you connecting the two things you're connecting something that clearly causes cancer
cigarettes and these studies that were made to show people that it didn't they are paid off. The studies are fake. There's there there essentially cherry pick fake studies. There were financed by the debate go industry to act in order to get people to buy more cigarettes. Your mom, in the same sort of chromium, about meat which means you think that meat is bad. Ardor. Ok, thus, but that's where where that's where our we're not weaken disagreement, that gonna done almost finished with evaluating evident also so, basically what we did when we export interviewed the export. Is we chose leading experts in their individual feels we collectively with thousands of articles in the peer reviewed literature right. So in this One of the bombers about the making of documentaries, like you, put the lower third on people to read it. So we have the chair of nutrition offered. The present american College of Cardiology, led data of your all chiefly MAC, Association, the Chair of Anthropology, Arbed, the directive.
Environment resources, Chatham Chum House really respected. So am I we can doctors. I saw some of them. Some are involved in hunting, some of them in animal testing. One of them during a chicken sandwich at lunch. So they must not say that this was a vague and bias coming interrupt. Is that true those long waits web we're stretching out or- and this is what we are talking just about this one section: will you connecting cigarettes in meat, so, you're saying that a safe and sourdough deserves the same play, but but there's no evidence that meat is bad. For you know what is going on and on about. This is something that is actually recently been established by mainstream medicine. You understand that right that they are released, new studies releasing these new studies, saying that there is no longer this concern, that red meat causes cancer or that this is also an appeal to an authority executive find many illustrious doctors and expert her highly qualified
that will disagree with never a point of view that it that a diet must be a hundred percent plant based and modern, say: ok, Jane, had kind of Zaire fire your position, I wanna, know work plan icily is adding going. I do you did you, but this was the connection that you made with cigarettes in the film nor our laws. Now. I think that is all that both promoting something bad because there's a profit, so you think that meat is bad for having their promoting it. Knowing that it's bad for profit gets so all Chris instituted by the phone right. Convince the people watching and listening that he knows me about the consensus and the experts in the field, like I, I know this is well. Is it if you are actually not that interested in consensus of experts? I'm looking at that research that is published the peer reviewed research publish the animals, including matter analyses and even
the views of men. Analyses of the Medina Perfect example, is the whole Darien cancer section totalling that we talked about. Well, you at argued, or Walter will argue that it there's your dairy products, cause cancer, and I pointed to a matter now. Seize it looked at over. Hundred and fifty different reviews that for an eighty, four percent of those found no association. So how is that not part of this discussion where we're talking about hundreds of scientists across different continents, different countries, their using reviewed science on show this, but in the movie just one expert- is pointing to you. No one group of studies without mentioning that that sounds disingenuous outline right to the two thousand eighteen million other we gotta slide for, though, if not I've got your slide hundred and sovereign state. Hundred and seven notices, two thousand nineteen million nine hundred thirty three studies right yeah and I can
I'm gonna go out and get my rent a lot further into it. Now is not the only one. I learn because at nine o clock last night until nine o clock last night, I thought Chris just made a bunch of mistakes into the data and I'm going to show you how he has is leading people on this study, so that we can perhaps hundred and seventeen is? Can we see the slight yeah? That's it? Ok! So you see what his brain quotes: eighty four percent of metals he's on dairy consumption short, even no association or an Inverse association between Darien Cancer, and then you go, point on what an inverse means that people are more daring at lower rates of cancer? That's what he's imply when you put them in what does that mean? You means as what he said that, but that that quotation is quoting the study right for enough
suddenly study. No, that's not what they sat in the study. That's right, my summary of the evidence of the steady rise? but when you put me in quite that's mislead, but that's his quote: ok, fine! Ok, that's the only way out, but these are putting things in corners rating. Let it go it on one outside it totally every that's up when you, when you see when you anything you do Literature, when you put some anglo dutch marcher, quoting the study that address MRS bypass them, augury? Ok, so keeping side, one or nine say what they actually said. This is the actual court. Out of a hundred and fifty three reported met, analyses he's comparing highest versus lower dark assumption. One nine. Seventy one percent sure no evidence of especially significant association between direct consumption, an instance of Kansas, twenty showed a decrease risk of cancer with their consumption and twenty four showed an increased risk of cancer. We're doing something now this is actually until last night, at nine o clock, I real
what he was doing you want to go to. I mean just a sum it up. You got aside one tenth way back and we Sandia place as you want Sierra Leone. Everyone here interpretation. Would you agree that that was the court from the study salute? Look, I got I'm I'm asking you what your interpretation it does that, in your mind, show a strong connection between Darien Cancer, George you're gonna really realise what Chris is doing. Really. I am glad that you bought yes, please answer what you're saying so. Can I just say reason you brought is because Walter what it said there is a strong extreme, prostate cancer and airy correct, so you ve got about something about all cancers. Yes, in this study? About half of the study showed a connection between prostate cancer and area in half right, so not a compelling argument that dairy honour this is associated with cancer. So can we got year in year out of coin flit, basically
But after all my little how to answer my question, I will I'm trying to tell his authority here. Looks like one tat: will its wits? with this explain this first novel moved along s lot aside and excellent is expanding. Ok, it's just breaking that down Boca. So there was that Scully significant associations pindaric consumption into cancers. Seventy one Jordan, no evidence, thirteen showed a decrease risk and sixteen central increased risk. So you see what Christa directive Thus he added seventy one in thirteen to make eighty four right develop. This is how you got it right, so you out seventy three percent: seventy one percent and thirty percent to eighty four breaks out statement from the study, was, four percent, showed no evidence or decrease risk. That's what he made. You believe will seven One percent shows no evidence that eighteen percent shows decrease right. Sorry, are you added to them together its eighty four percent shows, no evidence are growing or countries exactly, but he could have set is
we want simplistic themes that eighty seven percent he could have at eighty seven percent show no. Or increase risks. Eighty four one plus sixteen o, so I could make decline, no evidence or decreased from nowhere in council really getting really into suggest. You know, I'm not. The bird is that Ireland improve. You are claiming in the film was claiming dairy causes cancer. My claim was there's no. At the birth of the bulk of the evidence suggests there is no association or Inverse association. That's true, seventy percent shows no agrees. I greet thirteen percent shows decreased risk. Ok, so that by hold on a second throughout the decrease risk in the increased risk are almost the same rights on, which is how much talked about his home. We're just three percent shows input has risen and the ones on the point of this study is that this is his study that you brought up. This is very strong evidence guy his state. And was very misleading. He added up
those two and then I finished it ought by saying so basically, doesn't it first correlation, but he did not show could have said. Eighty seven percent showed no risk of increased risk, ensure instead he chose the summer is it sang eighty four percent, but there is no risk energy. Crete increase risk. That's right out of French. Our aim job creator, talking about something causing cancer, not exactly until you couldn't there wasn't China things to find the total cancer was increased right, but we just we as researchers, this included did it not industry funded research. Two thirds of searches in his right mind now. We know that red and research areas that are you are you proposing that we throw out every study because them, one of the main studies in your film, was sponsored by the house of a cot aboard the one with the claims that animal products contribute information on Non annex I regret and I'm not gonna turn. I'm sentiment. Industry funded studies and by the way industry pointed studies.
Typically only put them out and it shows in their favorite there's no obligation for industry when they do a study to release it. Yeah I'm pregnant. Like every other search our? What do you think that the industry in the meeting differences far more money in the plan? industry right would agree with that. Actually, we can look at some statistics on that list. That's my job I dont know certainly does anyone would you do it? Would you disagree that industry funded research has a forty eight times increased risk compared to non industry, funded research in fine conclusions in their favour? Thinking is, I think, industry research is definitely a problem, but I see it is problem across the board- and I have some statistics, and so do you knock again I'll admit you hear led the audience to believe that there is a potentially. Increased risk. Overall, you made it sound very high because you didn't split between the different. That was not. My intention was just it was
summarizing. The data could not to spend ten minutes as we're doing now. Talking about one study, runners there's! No you just because there is a very misleading claims when it's not enough leading it myself any other worryingly accurate if I said, showed no evidence or showed an increased risk. Eighty four percent daddy, seventy seven percent that seems like its mislead either now or be misleading, also during loading. He could have had that Britain, but we're talking about something causing cancer James. Exactly so, we shouldn't you making increased risk is what we're looking for, what for evidence of it causing cancer. Seventy one percent, the bulk of the evidence, shows no evidence. That's exactly what I have my point. Do you not yours, language or something but later this year, and I am saying they obviously jotted- doesn't show that you honestly don't think for that statement. Let us just putting the sum you I'm censured, no evidence. Thirteen percent showed that would be the fairest. The most honest exponent, like summary,
So I would say that if you wanted to say it the most accurately, yes that's evacuated, say doesn't ninety one percent showed no evidence. Thirteen percent should decrease risk, but I don't have a problem of saying Four percent showed no evidence or decreased risk. True cause we're tottering out something causing cancer deaths trial of equivalent. That's the relevant point. The relevant point is. Does studies show that dairy causes cancer, the primary owed, its mostly Evan says it shows no evidence or chose a decrease risk. That's the bomb. Eighty four percent versus eighty seven percent does no. No, no eighty seven percent shows increase. Risk is only sixteen percent. None of you no evidence to increased risks to get eighty seven percent lot. Ok, let's throw out the no no evidence that our words ya know about what we throw out. The burden of proof is to show evidence that indicates the dairy causes. Cancer you do a study and it shows that it doesn't, then that's not in supply.
Of the claim agrarian always going on agreeing with the Mets allows. This did not could not find association, but I'm all for pointing out that industry funded studies were included in it and they are more likely to find no connection. So there's a hundred and fifty three studies you naming, we should just that all of them are this refunded, and we should throw out this huge review, of a hundred and fifty three men analyses because of industry funding. What is the basis for that claim? Now? I'm not I'm saying that its ways, the results. Can you you can't do that, don't I don't, but you know I don't accepted I've. A hundred you just three studies you accept there were that they were in this met analyses that they're going to school, the results to the point where these findings are valid and we could do the same thing with this. All of the studies that you have linked to in the film We can also look at other studies.
Jerry and cardio metabolic outcomes that we have time. I got lots of large reviews that we can look again. Anyone can bring. You know this is a pointless discussions. Have if you just going to sit there and say industry funding does not. I only point now. That's not my only point I think you're saying it makes them suspect correctly. Could have to wait. Another has the boy how many and I agree with you about cigarette many of the hundred and fifty three study mega analyses which each also had individual studies in them are ours, so biased by industry. Funding that we can count I would hope that you would no more than I have been. Basically, why do I? But what why would you know this? Is this this? We can't get very far in this discussion. If you're going to claim that we can even talk about studies in the peer reviewed literature, because industry funding completely biases defining, saying that, because I'm saying just because they couldn't
though there were more showing an increased, uncharted decrease risk right. I am saying that it's possible that the industry finance, a misleading statements. Moorish increase than degrees us corral, but there's seventy one percent showed no, not only with that all Agro agreed. So that's awash with so no Why not even knows to know it's not a wash. If you have a hypothesis, this thing causes cancer and then you, you, a ton of studies and there's no association. That's that hypothesis is no longer correct. Not a while such it s actually not turbine epidemiology. If you have ten, that show no association and ten showing association. The net you oughta have managed you dont have at all, but I'm not. I don't know what he said he of eighty four percent of children, in other words, ideology, migrants and resources, the opposite. You could say eighty four percent showed no evidence and then
It in fact about decrease risk to say eighty four percent showed no evidence forget about decrease risk brought. You sit still have only sixteen percent showed an increase, rewrite that we will do in epidemiology study you don't you have to take into account all the other factors in these persons lives totalling of telling you what they were. They drank whether they smoke total they exercise sedentary lifestyle. There's a lot of factors that would, if you had something that was causing cancer, you would expect the results to be flipped. You would expect results to be. Sixteen percent show No, it's so showed no evidence. Seventy one percent or eighty four percent showed an increase that would be then you'd say hey. This is causing cancer. Mrs, like that's, not how between Roger works are, if you, if you had four epidemic jeez slippery, and I agree I really has not how I pity me I'll gi work. If you ve got if you have, even if you have ten studies showing no evidence just cause, you don't find something doesn't mean that exists in the absence of evidence. Is not the evidence of absence It will say this to you if you had a hundred studies and said
Those study showed an increase. Risk of cancer, when you say that thing causes cancer most likely most while every little epidemiology, then it so that we can concentrate aberration. Okay, so nervous, hundred studies and seventy percent now show no evidence when you say it's most likely that there's no evidence not that's how it works doesn't work? So if you got seventy studies that couldn't couldn't shower correlation and thirty percent the did that is still in favor of showing that there is a correlation, would not not shoot and one that would now doing seventy state we, if seventy percent because seventy percent of the people in these studies, if you have all these studies, if a hundred studies and seventy four the people in all these studies are showing an increased risk of cancer. We would we would a great right. This is why your comp causation based on observation, you would agree that shows like most negative. That right now is reversed. Now, sir, Ninety percent of these studies show there's no increase risk of cancer or eighty four percent for uniform, which is because you add in the
Greece risk when when I mean adding the decrease risk, which shows that you are less likely to get cancer which almost the same as an increased risk of cancer, which, in my eyes, is a wash. You would assume that we're talking about something that doesn't give you cancer. Well, that that that's. I agree that this study found that there were they couldn't privatisation that can prevent link between cancer, but you made it out like he was being disrupted, has been to set that I dont aggrieved that I don't know you that shrines either you're you're trying to show that these studies are proving, or at least making this correlation between consumption of dairy products and cancer, but the but it doesn't show that if want to look at it in its entirety. The evidence shows that most of the only one percent showed no evidence of it causing cancer. Thirteen percent showed its actually better for you
of less risk of cancer than not eating dairy thirteen percent, and this is even more showed increased risk of character. And again, when you talk about epidemiology studies, are you talking about? You know sixteen out of a hundred your view, have to throw and all the other factors, that's why they didn't find it, but you can I just the reason you point is up is prostate cancer right and I'm sorry, if you look at slide one hundred and thirteen prostate cancer was it that's disturbing. So it's fifty slash fifty with dairy consumption Let us not one by one third, but a lot of people get prostate. Cancer too, is none and also an issue hi is one reason is not, a high risk for males prostate cancer? Yes, it's a high one whether they are one twelve when they consume milk are not so I just in this matter, as the viewpoint to the highest action that they could find. In dairy and any type of cancer was passing on to serve. You look at the black line. That shows no,
sensation. If you look at the green line, that's decreased association and the red line was increase association. That was the mechanisms that you provided. So he brought you bought this thirty up. Because Doktor Walter Waterworth who's, the chair of nutrition, harboured he's one of the most publishing christian scientists of all time, if not the most public disagreement that right, and so he is coming admiration. The prostate cancer is linked, and it's like you, that's causal, and this very well back up half in half, that's There are no evidence of a causal relationship, since there is no evidence. A causal relationship dont know all too well an interest? Not only talk about this study granted I appeal to authority. You just said yourself: that's a rhetorical fallacy. Now it certainly is it's a fallacy unless it's appeal to valid authority because literally If I weren't you say so, if I won't listen, we look, it makes martial arts and Chris goes whatever dynamics. Martial arts,
but I think I know more about anthropology. Tricia, like I know more about boxing kit box, jujitsu and rustling so willing, but about the consent. We're talking about leading experts nephew with thousand reviewed, but an ancestor experts who were here the rhetoric of area. Last year's who would disagree and when I look at this study and reach the same exact conclude right? I did so because there is no reliable, no there's, no reliable, proven connect, then, between Darien Prostate, you have half studies showing an association have studies showing no association, not to mention the fact that that's as you just said that even if there was a strong relation that doesn't prove causation. What this is as I believe that you like this, because it included also randomize controlled trials. Yeah and, I think, should be
Should we trust Walter? What who were at the time of the child has addressed the studies. None of these companies. We learned about the gap recruited by were wearing way off here. We all regret the question was still in the infidels. Inferences made in the film whether you labour, intentional, or not on your part, that you know dairy people, Oh, there is going to cause prostate cancer they're going to extend that too. Cancer. There other claims in the film about Darien metabolic prop issues and suddenly fat metabolic issues. So the operative. Question that I'm trying to answer as do the data support that not derive Walter will think that or any other expert in the film do the data support that conclusion right and even in that study it. The data dont strongly support that. If I have studied saying yes have studied, saying: no, that's not a clear signal and it's definitely not evident even causal relationship us having Walter will it
or anyone say, there's a strong relationship and we know the mechanism and there's no, it's causal that cut out zero by the study. Was it didn't? You tell me that two thirds of people have an intolerance towards towards milk and dairy, and I have a study here. Is that what the numbers it's? Why not two out of three people in the world? old. Ok, we're gonna do this alone is actually to your points. So two out of three people have an intolerance towards dairy in the world and if you're talking about a study to chose fifty percent of the people in these studies that are consuming dairy there's, a correlation between prostate cancer in daring Wouldn't you assume that may be what they say one thing that we're talking about with two thirds of people written intolerant to something they consume This thing this entire causes information
in the body and that inflammation the body could possibly be leading to cancer. Correct, no, not correct very per day. Is inversely associated with information, so We could elaborate inversely associated with information, but if people are irritated by dairy, of an intolerance to dairy, and you said, two thirds of penal years. Here's what I would suspect there that if you we segmented those people out and said, let's do a study find out who's intolerant, very and find out who isn't you'd, see even better results for dairy, because, despite the fact that some people are lactose intolerant, we're still see being in that matter, analyses that you know most peep theirs association in most cases, an inverse association in other cases, Jason was penalised when you answer thing that hold on a second. But this prospect
Answer thing is not mobilized. Is fifty fifty right now, but why are you ve livelier, merging what you're saying you're saying if half of them? Ok? But if, if their gifts, half people can and does he have been argon too, and I can just think their second aboard. You see what Christmas that that's, not that's dead, but you see what he's the user epidemiology James, it's not dairy gives anyone cancer, its association or that's, not your master analysis include agronomic, can isolate ourselves. This is actually to you that. Can I stop this though wooden? If someone's intolerant of something that means your body is irritated by means of causes some sort of disturbance right, whether its inflammation or gastro, intestinal disorder, Easter, forwarding and that's what happens, and people are lactose intolerant right that irritates the body wooden there be Wouldn't you assume that something you're buying intolerant too, would possibly be the cause of disruption or disease. Sir, It could be right. So now, if I regret, but if you're looking at two thirds of the population are real intolerant tomorrow
that cause prostate cancer. No other cancers. Doesn't make those colleagues who have you right. That's why you, when you see that kind of thing in the data, it's a red flag, There's no logical explanation for why it will cause prostate cancer, but no other cancer. Can. I think there are more of an association there with with that Jamie pull up, but just Google dairy products and inflammation review of the clinical evidence. This is a review, systematic review of fifty two clinical trials and they found that dairy products were inversely associated with inflammatory markers, which means that people who consume dairy actually had lower levels of inflammatory marker. So the hypothesis that dairies, inflammatory and that's why it's causing cancer doesn't seem to hold up literature. So can I just say so. First of all in others, this Monday studies he can bring out. I'm not even the nutrition sign that someone like a combative train right, and so you
also said the unit unexploited nutrition, and so what we have to believe today is the Chris really is. It is about imagine our cities, but it's about mechanisms and spot the totality of opinions can all the avenues. Scientist one met analysis or imagine, as has been mentioned, our cities, but all of the data, and so what you're asking able to believe is that you are better at interpreting the data. Then experts in the field of any experts who would agree with me- none I just didn't, but whose to interview them in the film now. Actually we did it Did you see what I can tell you about the second? On the other side, I'll tell you, why would include them, but you, asking people, I would understand if somebody Chris, as figured out this neutral or diet, but he figures out some about nutrition, these better than the consent, there's more about a consensus and more about the majority of leading experts, but to believe that Christian more by anthropology, urology, heart disease, new environmental policy because
are you trying to try to use them for politicians and successfully bloc, as just a majority of Antipater, just agree with what I said. You chose the probably one of the few that would agree with the idea that humans, primarily a plant exclusively plant based diet, fur, promoting human evolution. We can go into that again. I am actually representing the consensus viewpoint and Anthropology James and I guarantee heart you'll be hard pressed. It was not to find a consensus group of acts. It's that agree with that idea, so you're saying that the Czech, using the richer Run on a charm anthropology that real interviewed does not represent the scientific consensus on Vondra. Apology if you're argue, that he is saying that humans, primarily eight plant based diet for and didn't and animal products were not a significant part of our diet through evolution than yes. That's what I'm saying it depends or re came from your quite right, but I want to go back.
So now you because you're only going to answer you? Are you arguing that there is a dumb consensus among nutrition exe it's in the. U s that everyone should be on a vague and diet, not so what? What's the art? What's the argument here that we should people should plants, and my argument is yes, they should and an animal products can also be part of that new Termorrer healthy, I'm omnivorous diet, and I think you would find a dominant consensus of nutrition experts. It agree with that tribute that's not the way this film is being interpreted if ever there was a biased going entered. So, for example, when you go to U S military right! The game changes the first. Commentary that has ever been accredited by the defence held agency for the Department of Defense, it's the first documentary that has ever been supported by the special Operations medical center.
They didn't come into it. Looking at the science has been evaluated by hundreds of Phd researchers to come to that conclusion. There we do not really know how so evaluate how so you can get coordination year. Material is evaluated by this depart due to fence held agency of the Department of Defense, which decide what the military's eating they don't give a crap about. Oh, let's, Lisbon Bedside, it's on ever on evolution, they care. What is the science and the dot dangers? The first document, it has ever been accredited by the defence help agency faded. Look at this NGO go okay. This is over. In propaganda film, then why are you saying that hundreds of Phds have reviewed this and reviewed all because data in it to come to this conclusion, and is this proven, is printed is as some published paper where it shows your hundreds of people have reviewed. This fell.
And found all the claims to be credible and that all the debunking of it or not, the defence health agency, has reviewed this film in detail digging into each other, studies, rubber, you're saying you again called to authority using hundreds of phds of have studied this, who are not people, while this there's a lot from the defence, how they, say: there's a lot of people, especial brazen, Baroness Ashton, that came to the decision, making lost his reason: nutrition Phds in nutrition. To get that quotation. That just hasn't happened before because I didn't come into it thinking this is of Eden propaganda that was a biased going into. It were again talking a lot about expert, some in their place, it was right and a glass of rights must never. Opinions are not criss Cross Frontiers opinion. It's not That's a strategy is now this is about my opinion and Ike weaken filled the room with experts who agree with me. You had an expert, a debate with it actor in the UK on a tv show we disagreed with you. We can,
always rise, and we always find people who agree, and degree, with all kinds of different credentials. Its disingenuous to claim like I said that I am now here to argue that plants are unhealthy, We shouldn't be eating a lot of plants. This is the fallacy that gets created with these kinds of films. It's not a choice is between a standard american dying, crappy processed food diet that contains me or of Egon Diet. It's there is, Possibility of a plant based diet Our diet has a lot of plants that also contains animal products and that compare comparing not with a hundred percent plant based diet, that is the operative questions about the film the film is, I believe, Let me in Derry about the fountain but probably I do believe that I think- sufficient got in a less than talk about that, because, if you look at our website and telling people
and resources on what to eat a second. We say it: or something it doesn't have to be all or nothing. So we we're talking about eight, but that's nice, but what you just said. You think that meat is bad for you. Please, dairy and back you download. I could see the argument for talking about two thirds of people being lactose intolerant. I would see the argument that for two thirds the people. Dare is probably not good for you. There was an illusion studies. Dozens doesn't support that. But but I mean we can say I can what is lactose intolerant if you're in town if something major bodies not enjoying not definition of other way. That's not the only issue with member states on their that's a giant number. Two thirds of people are lactose intolerant. If you'd, if you your bodies, intolerant of something, but you keep consuming that. Your buys intolerant of. I would naturally assume, as absolute admitted non expert, that that's not good. So
two things here: number one. I've always for years, have written dairies very individual and depends on your tyrants number to their allotted dairy products with virtually no lactose in them. So cheese, for example, hard cheeses, no lantos, you know cream no lacked very little lactose butter, very no lactose ye know lactose yogurt fermented dairy products like a few no lactose. So, while I agree with what you're saying, if someone is lactose entirely, should avoid dairy products that contain lactose when you look at the studies on dairy and connections with conditions like cancer information, which has just pointed out with this study- and you look at cardio metabolic outcomes which I'd like to cover, because that Klute heart disease and diabetes and overweight, obesity, etc, there is not any strong evidence that dairy contributes to those conditions. So, let's, let's look at those actual societies Chris, what you you talk, really
battle against epidemiologist aren't can't prove causation and then, when you like it, you cited so you'll give epoch. We also have the same way with you James, I'm sort of ways to you. I haven't. I was eating, that's right up, so you can, if the burden of proof, if you're, claiming Something is bad for you. The burden of proof is on you sharp men, so you can't say it's bad for you, night show epidemiological studies and our cities by the way that were included, not men analyses that doesnt support that, and then you say: oh, we can trust the resource use and we're going to any of your own. Hypocrisy is saying that you say that you said that immunology, that's observational says just looking at people. You have said that we cannot rely on those and then you there site them yourself. I didn't we cannot rely on epidemiology. I say you have to consider the caveats it with epidemiology, but again the burden of proof if you're, claiming that a food is bad. For you,
burden of proof is on you, research. Did it ain't right? Let me say, for example, eyes: I saw it coming recoveries without me. Please I, for example, festival there's an inflammatory mediators, for example, like he Mayan. Second, All we look at population determine show increase, causes of morbidity and mortality for people they eat less meat or the moment so that it does these causes of morbidity. You just said the runway. Yes, decrease has decreased risk of more morbidity and mortality, which is be real clarinet because he said it wrong and so that everybody live recital let's forget to randomize controlled trials to these are not observational stuff is that the first found that increasing red meat consumption by replacing carbohydrates and died of individuals without anemia, actually reduced markers of inflammation diverges proposing what are called artworks, passwords, etc. So Jamie, if you want to
all this, I mean these are on websites, crusher, DOT, ceos last game changer is, but that that study is calling for east lean red meat and take does not elevate markers of occident of stress and information in humans leave. A study that doesn't so these are Arcy tease, random. So there actually controlling it. Instead of just looking at observational data, which is subject to healthy user bias, these are the United States, that's that, one study and then there is another one, another Arcy tee in women with anemia inflammation markers on our diet, high and read me or not, significantly different from those on a diet high, an oily fish
and there are also numerous studies of paleo diet, but which contain meat and other types of animal protein and show that they decrease markers of information, including C r, p, there's randomize control trial, showing reductions in Interleukin six and also in tumor neurosis, factor alpha any sites. So all of this suggests it's not me. It's what you eat with the me that makes the difference Studies of chlorophyll eating, chlorophyll, rich green vegetables decreases the formation when they trust so compounds with me. Have lots, studies showing that when you eat plants along with me, then you don't see the effects that you might see. If you're just eating right that all grass standard American die migrants are offsets like some. So if an animal furs crates oxenham distress, you have it with the plant foods and that would have the antioxidant now it off set it up as total. More complicated
I think it is more complicated than that about half an hour. We won back, as I said last time and as I have always argued, I'm not a proponent of current carnivore diet, I'm not alone our guy, I'm not a Kido guy, I'm my fun our argument is just that the optimal human diet contains both plant and animal foods, and this focus on individual food components or macro nutrients like protein or fat or carbohydrate. We ve gotten too much. It's called nutrition ism? It's just focusing on these individual elements and ignoring the overall pattern of diet, quality, which is the most important thing and that's what out of the more recent studies are shut. When you look at the diet, pattern and diet quality on its overall. That's what actually makes a difference in terms of health and life span, not how much of this fat, how much of that fat, whether there's no red meat or white meat or
Fischer whatever it's the pattern. Let me talk about it because this is was as one of the primary misconceptions of people. How about consume? We meet when they hear studies that say that meat is associated with mortality or high cholesterol. Our heart disease are all these different factors. We are talking about these kind of studies. Were people fill out a form? tell us what you eat the how many days we do eat me how many days a week doing this, what they don't take into account. Is whether or not these people are going to Wendy's and weather. Their grass tat mistaken and an, and you know and broccoli something healthy, there's a giant difference between those two things but there are lumped in together, because this is meat consumption. Others that the studies are perfect for sure, but your assignment you like it saying we should look at outcomes and not just look at individual markers. Writes that, basically, I'm saying we should look at the diet quality. The overall diet pattern, so Grandpa Christopher Gardener did study at stand
third a couple years ago and he took too instead of saying yes low fat, low Carb took two groups, any advice and all the basically eat a healthy diet and then one group aid, a low fat, healthy diet, neither grew beta, low, carb, healthy diet. They all lost wait. There wasn't big of a different our during the two greater migrants, are first of all in terms of health. I would be put in my opinion, would be I'm pretty much macro neutering agnostic. So I wouldn't like I'm not advocating high Cobb. All Cobb. I think that people can do healthy. Well, I think, for athletes they need a lot more Cobb's source going, those from plants I think that certain athletes that can slowing study state where bearded mothah oxidation. I think that stones studies they outweighs kinda but like an animal fighter, a soccer play as possible. We heard earlier. I remember you just said that you were. You were not low. Carb right, you said you not local.
I'm not I'm not. I low Carb advocate I've. Written articles called seven thing, seven reasons you should be cautious I'm not saying I'm not look a low carb advocate out. I dont believe everyone should be on a low carb diet. Never deleting your somebody thing is Chris has, as it doesn't have the consensus definitions of carbohydrate level you ve made up your own definitions right. When did I make my own while this slide eighty Jamie? If, if you do that, we are just point Zack bitter the man who had on the podcast yesterday, you hold the world record in raw. A hundred miles in eleven hours, and I think it's eighteen minutes he's on a low carbohydrate diet again, you two other signs. That is that you can janitor well, Sir it's her, Chris, your recommendation, your definition, low com is ten to fifteen percent in the next slide. Criminality want. So, if you look at a pair of Europe,
to try to either less than thirty percent, or the next lie Jamie less than forty percent, like views across all the lectures lesson. Thirty or forty Moderate Cobb according to Chris next slide. Jamie would be fifteen to thirty peer reviewed literature, next car side, forty to sixty five and then High Cobb Chris cause more than thirty percent, and a pair of you future high Cobb more than sixty five on the next slide more than seventy, depending on the bare viewed literature, so you ve come up with your own definitions of what is low, moderate, nigh com net. Just for the purpose. Just I was further jeopardize of my work with people that that's not relate. I wasn't trying to represent research there. I just job, that's what I can Sid are to be low, carb, moderate carbon, carved in my work with patients. They join my recommendation: did you not just their him? So he did it mean that that is what you said. I mean you when you wrote this out. You did have a different definition:
then, the pair of scissors life recitals. We aren't you do lighted by his definition. Have your own idea said ninety com, you heard him say this view heard him say not ask us outside of the prisoner. So I just want to sum this up, but what's the point here, because I was the one who said that everyone should be on a low carb guy I agree, and I have always argued that it depends on everything from your genes to your exercise. Pirate credit. Where are you getting your numbers from like when you write low, carb, moderate carbon hike arm? He made them up. This is just erect this. This is a clinical recommendation from my experience working with patients, I'm not representing the science, the glitter two here, I'm not trying to make arguments about we're talking about NATO short sighted madness that that's absolute madness to come on the throne. Fishes, and this is why I feel that crystals and when you have people,
Chris on multiple times it throws people's perception of what is a healthy diet, because Chris misrepresents the data. He comes up his own definitions of thing, He misrepresents things that we set in the film. What did when its representative but both, but I'm gonna get an animated allowance that we learned that was here. It was just talk about this report. What so we're talking about low carb? Moderate cars are high when your recommending to your patients, low, carb, moderate carbon, Hi carb these definitions, and how are you coming to these conclusions, made them up now basis. So there are a lot of people James. They disagree with the the car the range assigned, an incisive in in yeah. That bears a scientific consensus. How many different scientists were were pulled on this? How many from studies were show, I dont know what is inside her did it in its entirety lake, but although this is something that you just found that disputes his position
This is like a large group of nautical ok, so slight, eighty nine was consider Verde Health, users in over the folks averted who are all scientists at ease of use, acute agenda, very low, carb diet too. Now it is your teachers and diabetes not actually growled, let resolution you will not be in key doses at thirty percent carbohydrate, where twenty five percent, or twenty percent or or even fifteen percent for frontier tat was seventy below so yeah, probably laboratory turnover is really. I don't think so. You know that an and then you have four it is sixty five resent you're, not you're, no you're, not even in the ballpark. You know so, if for modern thinking about using low carbohydrate diet, for example, for weight loss or for diabetes or metal, issues like Verde Health is doing. Then you low Carb is not going to be thirty to forty
sat up like that than us in our work, so that, where am I recommend you, a random Hamish, rhombus being is not always faced on. No beast. On the optimal range. If you have, if you look at the rest, the article is going to be like if you ve got diabetes, you ve got your overweight or obese you're trying to lose way. This is the rains that I've found and other experts, like the people at Verde Health have found will be most effective, and these are that knowledge is not there's no representation, that this is the range that is defined as low carbon in the scientific literature, so that your time you call it low car because of someone's on a key, degenerate, low, carb diet. Or to get into Couteau says you have to have a look number of carbohydrates, actually, probably even below ten or even just to be inky terseness like just to get the maximum weight loss. You know someone could be at fifteen percent and still guess aren't we all without being in Qatar driver. I gotta dropped because just like in the last five minutes, you showed
study from trying to prove your own point that low carbon low fat people had a quiver equivalent fat loss. You just said that so why and I now all of a sudden advocating only low carb diet for nobody letting only low carbon southern that that they can both work it further Peter, and I really must, but James your misrepresenting way was saying. What are you saying is getting people to go on a healthy diet versus the standard american diet? Also he's not just talking about blow car versus high carp. What he's talking about getting off bullshit like process, in sugar and eating I wholly agree with, and when you do that, people no matter what low carb or high carbon lose way, but I think you will agree as well as almost anybody would that getting on a low carbohydrate diet and forcing your body indicators, This makes your body burn fat, that's one, why that's shrunk, but it's it's proven.
Not only are the other piece of this is most of the studies are comparing healthy, omnivorous diet with plant based weakened diet. Their comparing vague and diet with standard american diet that contains animal proteins are what we ourselves not assign paler dinosaurs, neutral Bordighera, yet which, by the way, has any of your work or your idea has been published in the scientific literature. I've never claim that they are just. Why does wandered so you didn't wonder needed one no I couldn't find husband, but doesn't that way, you're saying you got in and try to make it seem that he's less of an expert, for he is I'm not export either. So what's that Why is no here? Why am I here while I actually, I did ask if I could bring much signs of eyes or who has a double masters, reenact size, busy, ology and nutrition, his original dietician the door of his papers, and we can talk about him, then totally by think we should serve us more. We just its request. We still have.
Come to this an understanding of why you think meat is bad for you, your Basinger largest source, there's the individual components like he might. For example, when we talked about that last time He my iron is only associated with poor. Comes in the? U S! It's not as I do not trust. Not it s not true, and in other countries is not following you let him and then we can give us an encore refuted. Europe do not want another Fang met. Analysis which looks at most of the study Is it have been done on that and then, if you also consider that when you add green vegetables and other plant food spices, and all of that it reduces the oxygenated capacity of Heem Iron and reduces the absorbed, and if he myron- and you know again we're talking about, Diet pattern. Not just is,
are you eating read me, you know in Mcdonald and fast food restaurants, but if you are you eating it in the context of an overall healthy diet and does not have the same effect right? Do you know how to read or forest block this summer? I dont. What does that mean but both you looking at this. This is the competent and are going to call the forest spliced plot plot the complex like a bunch of truth. Ok, so you don't have to redefine plot So how do you actually looked at the study? I have learned to study? I guess I just read or how to read it. So it's kind of get a microphone changes, Pulitzer grower So you see the first of all. He said that the white, but upon the screen on, if you still got the slide, but you said that the key Mine Association, was only in Americans right, but the conclusion that study said
he mine was associated with a kind of aspects that was a conclusion. Is that she didn't, but upon the spring and then something like the quota put up was with respect to you. My iron and take, we found a significant association only in the studies that were based on american cohorts right. So there's two things about that was from the study. The first thing I got a call, linked my slide on orders, but basically Can you just read the conclusion of that study because I come from a slide. The conclusions is down there. A higher dietary intake of him. Iron is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, whereas no association was found between sea cardiovascular disease and non he Myron intake or total iron intake So in an old woman, I just read the quote just now:
Ouch was incorrect by the way that the authors made a mistake, so how they make mistakes. So if you look at this forest plot, for example, this keeps teen rubbish, and you can go and look at me. I've looked at the individual studies that there were references in the matter, analysis as my scientific them, so basically this is a one point. Eight six would constitute an integral being one point, one for two three point: zero: nine that is significant connection between he might. And you can look at me- the conclusions and what you're saying that what he said about eating with green leafy vegetables, Renate Sommer, absolutely have to point out that I don't think this on true. Furthermore, unlike the dairy one, where I think that he was being a bit misleading, I'm this case, I dont think you'd be misleading. I think you, I think that you are
there is no misleading, it was summarizing. We already went over this area and we would like us to create the impression, but there was an open minded and I think you're bring rooms, and this goes. I do not think there has been misleading at all. It did say what you but in the study, even though you didn't point out the conclusion, you left out the conclusion of the study. But what wasn't your fault is, I think you are You read the study, but you are. You admitted that you can't you don't know how to reforest plots and the forest bought it. Good luck, I mean you're out a rhythm you'd show that there are three in the Netherlands and Sweden. That did show significant correlation. What you are trying to make out with this point, which I understand when you're trying to when you have a point of new, and you trying to work it backwards. What you end up doing, try and find studies that suit your position, and so you went to found a studying. You found a quote. Even you didn't like to put the conclusion of the study.
I did say that there were four hundred acknowledge that there was an association but their remit. Business on american cohorts appetites not in there. But it's not it's not your fault, because the study, the people in Europe who wrote the the right up to this I made a mistake that worse. It is very significant because one point, on for two three means that those like a fourteen percent to three hundred percent increase in One study of half in the Netherlands that the Kirsten Clifton probation for people watching don't look at the study looker incursions, there were three because his point was what you try to infer from that was that the american diet includes a bunch of junk food is from the ones in Sweden and Ireland, where they are eating so much comfort, but actually- incorrect, so he mine has been associated and is recognised. There has been associated and we still have the studies that eating fruits and vegetables attenuate the active capacity from him, iron reduce absorption of iron and
got an hour focusing on a single mechanism, rather than looking at the outcome fright, which I again I'm happy to look at the outcomes. Do you agree with what he just said? I do tat I ve Myron. I think the plan foods offset the oxidation Ralph. Sat and certain some regard, the oxidation that you get from animal efforts. However, if you work out, you have accelerative stress, so if you I want to have a meal, do you want the plant foods in the meat to be dealing with the option of stress from the animal foods, or do you want the plants to deal with the same stress? Allow you to recover faster and your next work out will be better. I think we know that's true now we do know that you're gonna hurt you and that's. How do we know that in all areas surrounding none of this is that he just radon as I'm, because we are not focusing on the nutrients and read me and the things that and a highly by available protein, it's not like red meat is only there to cause is, is causing oxter data stress, I agree is not add anything
some nutrients and me so again. The question is: is there a place, fur animal foods in a diet It is hardly overall, not not whether yeah you should eat plant foods right. We both agree that use your body and a lot of plan for his right. We're just my position. I think it would be difficult for me to argue a hundred percent play Its restrictive semblance, I dont think, has argued for our delight argue like ninety. Ninety five cent plans versus I think the argument would take out. Thousand hours. To commend you why I think on represent plants is, I think there is definitely bio, very ability and I think, different people- Very often we are going to ask a second, I wanna make sure and are simply shrug case. Can repeat that sets are my position? Is that the literature, I think so easier argument, because we're talking about plant based diet and precise Roger limiting or limiting or eliminating animal products right so for plant by general diet in general, right civilian, maybe some vegetarian like if you return
key on Thanksgiving and then your fish once a month, I would say: that's a plant based, I you're getting the vast majority, the Kalis from plants. And I think most people, even if your Eden past you're, getting the vast majority of your calories from plants log jam if we talk about what's a healthy at the hands diet as the problem rather whole plan for the rotten shitty american diet is plant based, you're talking about ones and bread and bull shit and tender butter and jelly Sunday. Let's all law, visions of the returns just cause, you figure vegetarian, doesn't mean your health exact rightly there. My argument you're. Getting the vast majority of your calories from hope comforts right, agreed, you re. Why don't think the vast priority is my position, but I think that's his position ray. I agree, but he saying I think that look. I eat animal products. I have for a long time. Are you a lot of vegetables as well? I think that an arm,
his diet is: is the key to health? That's what I believe. I believed that meet helps recover faster. I think it's more nutrient rich. I think there's things in meat that is very difficult to get in plants, and I think that quality of the amino acids and the quality the protein content and adopted a superior to that implants are demonstrating. That was in the woods to talk about that, because it's one of the things you brought up- and I can I just say that I agree with the type of meat that you read. We know that, like there's, not studies done the information and out, but there is studies on informing kangaroos, for example, in Australia. Some tony wild courts, that's like their equivalent of outcry and there is about half the information coming from that as there is from beef. Why would imagine mean you're talking about a much healthier, much higher protein. Turning the difference between the protein content in EL per hour versus the protein content and beef is almost double
the giant and we have just had an eye glass is controlled. Trousers showed that showed less inflammation with eating. Read me now, but the thing is that its tricky when is something healthy or something inflammatory, it's always compared to what so somebody, studies. What the industry does is to compare red meat to bacon or that are in no doubt about that. Richard opposite to what your work is. The other way around. They compare plant based diet with standard crap, western diet. Niagara! that's that compare Sonny Boy, why saying need is bad for you also, I'm images start with the HE mind, but the him iron in conjunction with plant based food site. You are showing that this is because of the enormous reserve is the big one of them primaries. Because oxidation antioxidants deal with oxidation, UK oxide and you get provocation from the third idea. You also get products sedation from exercise did now. Division
we're talking about Makin, a young, isolated makin it in writing. To talk about the Chris, you talk about mechanisms when you want to, and you talk about, pre clinical data when you want both we and I have a talking about them in response to the claims made in the film because our Euro zones or mention new five DC tm ere, he Myron, and so I brought those up in you, know too responded and other that's not when you use them, because if you go on your website, illuminating saying we shouldn't ever talk about mechanism stains, I'm saying if, if you're talking about mechanisms but the outcomes don't support the mechanism, then what's the point, why they weaken the integrity mythology and look at that, but I think we should have we had protein, because I think that everyone watching, I guess the biggest mirth and biggest sort of gripe- and I think we should definitely be twelve Solomon Shillings girl, would be twelve because one You said that he disputed was, did bring up that be twelve quote that you said was complete horseshit. I can read about you. Want God, please be Twa! Is this if you disagree
what you are creating be twelve, isn't made covering the whole thing and then so be twelve. Is made by animals is made by bacteria. These animals consume in the soil and water just like with protein in animals are only the middlemen before industrial farming. Farming, famine more than humans could get be twelve by eating traces of dirt on plan foods or by drinking water from rivers or streams, but now because pesticides, and about Some chlorine kill the bacteria. The produces vitamin even for animals have to be given, be twelve supplements, and you said, that's just all false. That's all it is factually wrong, so first of all, be twelve, is made by bacteria about its animals, don't get from consumers Saddam water. First of all, you misrepresented what I said so I said it's made by bacteria that these animals consume. You to say the animals didn't
bacteria from the soil. That's not what I say. I said they get it from the bacteria got from the soil. So you misrepresented what I said you you look he claims he may James is that as part of a pot used to be possible to get be twelve by eating dirt on plant food threat from drinking water from rivers are streams. I've still not seen convincing evidence that programme China's I'd forgotten, Jack, Norris of Egon petition has admitted as much in his article and then even more, and then all of that is looking at, be twelve deficiency rates between begins vegetarians and omnivores in the clinical literature like the other stuff is not really. Event until you get to resume the clinical and can be addressed, and I asked each of your critiques than is that ok, Sir First of all, You said a zero evidence, the be twelve is fed to cattle right. You said that answer, guy doesn't first Euro zone.
As I said, even farm animals keep up slide. Forty four, as I said, even farm animals have to be given be twelve supplements there. That's what I said so he decided you mean all farm animals are so you see that that is a screen cap from the from that's a chicken and down the bottom. There's the court for the poultry right. So would you disagree that, pigs and chickens, and now I dont disagree that may sometimes get be twelve, but do does my mouse? What about shellfish shellfish? are extremely high in between there. The highest even other total non secretary, and if this is not actually blunders implication in the film was the reason you get be twelve from eating animal products, is because their given be twelve supplements to the urine suddenly. So you really suggesting that the like the population gets Mozart's between from
shellfish. No! I'm saying that the claim that animals need to take be twelve supplements in order to have be twelve in their flesh. So it does not matter and chickens, got it from James Well, you can check it out and about the shellfish was I never claimed Chicken was. A great certain eliza. I said you I said in the film even farm animals have to became patrons use That is absolutely false. Everything that I set about twelve years. I was absolutely false as well, which is also you talking about the people used to be able to get it from consuming vegetables right over recommendation I read on and that the water is now because, pesticides and clear- and I am the water no longer has nuclear, the same percentage of of you. You picked one study that showed equal rights. Deficiency, and I are the hue, my no amount of literature that shows big differences between regions.
Vegetarians in other countries- and I address volatile deficient- I know all of your critiques. I've noted them. I've got a point for each one. So can I just got shot and then you can, if you disagree, you can so. Could you just generative about forty five and rotten framework? trot going about humans. What we'll get to that in a second, but that that I may be twelve adjust, We found the chickens in Europe. We would agree with that right and I'm pigs and given that the court room like ruminants concrete, be twelve, and I got from the bacteria tat, so but you, bronchitis, bivalve, None are shouting dishonest universal darling. So since you brought up capital, you said that cattle there's no evidence of cattle being abattoirs, Willy Brandt Flight, forty, six vitamin be twelve sheep and cattle? That's what it says. Yes, it there's no evidence so
that is no haven't. So lonely left that, just because we were minor battery the small print. Well, listen! There's people just listening sigh for listening, so twelve injection for sheep and cattle there's three progress has added to feed on illapses as a liquid, complementary, complimentary, feeding, stuffs continues, actual trace elements, cobalt, celestial find tree of be twelve deficiencies, caress. That's due to some soils and it being called asked which has a lot of cash? So now, if you just gotta slide, forty seven, please very mixed lie: ok, This is the largest supplier of animal feed supplements in the world on their website. Young ruminants requires supplemental vitamin, be twelve prior to full ruined development. They also say five. Ninety sometimes administered peremptorily too food law, cattle and also
Twelve, by the way has been shown to increase milk production. You said there was no evidence that cattle are given be twelve, and you said that all my statements were absolutely false- do at least that, met that you are wrong there. If I said that we're gonna go out all that specifically that One portion of the statement is no evidence at all. Don't ever get be twelve supplement or deny what everybody says he's a fertile. When I made the full statement this, what you first said, that's just or false: that's all just fine she'll, be wrong and then later on, you said, there is also a zero evidence. The be twelve is fed to cattle. That is flat out wrong and I have just shown that is that if I was wrong So we'll get another point, because you were wrong about many other things as well I'll get so Citys. Are you agree that dumb in order fed to cattle? So you want to look at humans Chauncey, with the point that you brought
thereby giving minerals and fee indifferent things too. That's not what he really enjoy the point. If cattle are deficient because they're in feed lot, where they're not eating grass an army that and That is the primary reason it has no more because I becomes our young girls, don't house, no remedies are young cows that are most like right from the start we have been getting. I know you know me be twelve from animals. Do this? Do you dispute that? the primary source of be twelve. Human beings has been eating animals and also fish and shellfish in history. I'm from revenge. Is that by a bug, are dangerously. Where is the evidence that that the rivers and streams and dirt has been a primary law or I'm gonna? Be I'm also going to give it to you? I don't think I came at the bed. You think I may claims in the film, but I couldn't backup, perhaps
because I love you, I love you claims we did. We we went over those in the last show that's nice. That would be twelve shore so can we discard to slide forty eight, My second plum, so little concentration fluctuated between one hundred years is in levels of water in the English Lake District. If you wanna go to slide forty nine the vegetables, where individuals were eaten without being carefully washed, the strict vegetarians who did not price, handwashing or vegetable cleaning, maybe untroubled by vitamin, be twelve divisions, By the way we were retained, vitamin d twelve ashore with adequate to prevent be twelve. So what you're, certainly saying as it were, dealing with be twelve, that was in soil on land and water and that by the coronation and filtration,
Estimates that we use today, that's what's ruining the water in the water does not how these rules on adopting more than there are a good thing. Yes, but that also takes out the be twelve shots, argues that makes your statement correct. So sorry he was wrong. That's not the consensus view that you can get enough. Twelve from eating unwashed Not all I'm not, as has now what I didn't actually say. That was the consensus view. What he said in the statement was that the reason why we no longer have be twelve in the water in the soil is because the fact that they are chlorine and pesticides in that seems like there's evidence to back. That's our again arrogant and our people question did. I spent a thousand hours now that I'm giving you the facts. Do you question that I spent a thousand hours I've spent and another thousand miles. Looking appear, viewed research since then, You say you have no reason to disbelieve. It's a lot of time, so lot of two thousand Ours is a lot of time like what was it lean, lay Norton, so that you'll probably have gotten a phd I've, while I don't think
the testing as people a lot smaller than me that are making these but we in the manner that amount of ours of research you little I've estimated that I've done conservatism. I've done since then about three thousand hours, because once you start making the cylinder not tonight and anyway. I believe you so anywhere else. So can I twelve analogues in the soil than aren't absorb. The new lives like true, be twelve for great budgeted, and you don't. I think, like any treatment, the two things, the things we ve you touched on so far, you you got run down slowly, that its proven that cattle do receive be twelve, under whatever sorrow chances. I don't know whether it's because they're grass FED or grain FED I'm assuming they're feedlot animals that don't get proper nutrients from soil. For I don't get property, I mean if your getting these Greenfeld FED soybean. Fed cattle in there. Just pouring this dried out shit into a bucket. These animals are not grazing and their direct, but likely deficient in a lot of different things, and that is why there is also the
always been supplementing their die with minerals supplementing eyes die with vitamins. That's the funny people like all. Well, let's just the extreme end of pipe my style Reagan's right in Serbia, our regions, have a duty to supplement or guess, walk you're supplementing anyway, you're just doing it in the right. You are eating that kind of ninety nine some of the somewhere around ninety seven nine would up so excited vast majority, so where people are getting it, you just supplement and you're, not just some rainbow be twelve years on amending d in the coming years, getting it from someone supplements it in the feet of the animals, and then you get it. That was generally not a few eating grass FED beef, not infuriating, shall, via the only right. Well, it's not like you loved grass FED beef again. Why right? But I suggest that you might be stuck here to submit the amendments that about mothers, things be twelve in cattle and then you have a third point, so we had to be taught me
at all you had the big you there's no haven't. You said it was zero evidence about that. You said there was no evidence about being able to get it from waters and from TAT, which again I proved to be for you to be wrong, and then the third thing you said He said that there is no evidence that humans primarily got there be twelve from eating from soil and water would not use an ominous alone. Now I didn't your misreckoning he's misrepresenting and his wronged- you gotta admit, but in this case both clearly wrong about be twelve being given to cattle mean we showed. We dealt with the problem is that this is an utter says before industrial farming, farm animals and humans could get be twelve by eating because of dirt on plant foods or drinking water from rivers are street correct. You don't think that people will get the idea from hearing, not that we never needed to consume animal products to get be twelve and lay down. We could we could get plenty from eating corral
where is the evidence for it for that other than the one study that you showed their that that's, because most evidence begins as even vague, and these are fodder manning. These are modern, vagrants right. That's what he's just talking about supply by using what is going on track. Everyday items got two things wrong for everything on this consider. His statement is essentially saying that the reason why we dont get it today's because of recent maritime subordination cast his eyes at us. So the third point you I said this. You took issue with my plan and up to thirty nine percent of peace, tested including meat does allow in be twelve as a result. The best way for humans to get enough be twelve, whether animal foods or not, is simply take us but then you said he didn't provide a reference for that. So it's hard to check, broken a contradiction. Are mounds of evidence on the television so Gabriel UP slide. Fifty pleased me, you said that I didn't provide a reference, but in the bottom
left where we put all of the reference was an ivory. I made a claim about. The scientific research is covered by the elbow and sudden, or they are largely the reality. So? First of all, there is the reference Ukraine, but who have reference? Would you admit that I miss that three times wrong about be twelve? Ok, so. Can we just go into your study yachts, our your e book on beef. Well, you basis that I don't know. I got that study from your be twelve e book opens with the exact same study. So can you put up slide fifty one? Please join me is that your book on the left? Yes, you rounded up to forty but a cabinet. Thirty nine. Has been specific. Between deficiency is far more common than most healthcare practitioners and the general public realise data from the Tufts University framing and offspring study suggests that forty percent of people between the ages of twenty six and eighty three,
plasma be twelve levels in the low, nor arrange a range at which many experience neurological symptoms. That was the opening statement of your be twelve, your book and you claimed that, where you couldn't find the evidence of that study, I know disagreement that between deficiency is an issue. I talked about that on my website. That's not! Why not what you said on last: I'm your own transport costs. You said I dont know you didn't provide a rough. Four that's hard to Jack, but it contradicts the evidence if that's not reflective of the preponderance of evidence. Why did you open your e book with it. It's not ok, so there's two different issues here, is due omnivores get be twelve deficiency less than I am Not only will test in this study, which is a very rough road. That's right. There are many. I'm not saying this study is look at all of you have already provide a reference, but did you do you write your own e books by the way I do
dont. Remember that study! No, I ran a lotta. Do you have any idea how many articles I've written over the year. Do you remember every study from every hour Michael. I dont know right now I remember the Arabs and ass. The thing do not feel it. I'm a combative trainer. U yours recognize that you're, not a nutrition expert right. You said that the begin I'm not nutritionists I've masters level, training in nutrition souls I'm so embarrassed to use you gotta move number is wrong about be twelve years to what is specifically me. Like masters level training nutrition price, Andalusia. Well, a foreign yeah Acupuncture S, have for your masters programme, which includes a lot of medical sciences and nutrition, research, methodology, etc, because we're consider primary care providers in the state of California. So the training his lot different than it is in other places. So
there is the question of cannon divorce develop between deficiency? Yes, they can. If you go in Ryan it, and I don't get and arrest the Eba, it's because of things like see both right and we really must not, as high ranges you're actually set higher ranges of what would be considered potentially deficient right. I would also like three four hundred might be deficient, so that would mean that even more people would patient right now, I'm not arguing that victims can be more efficient and omnivores, but can I just go to slide fifty to one hundred and fifty two? So what is it? What is the question here? If you're, not arguing that I'm does love is not reflected not be more, is more common long Undines wanting out animal vegetarian pointing out that unit? That is what clinically makes a difference. Is between deficient. I got than that I think I'm not prepared to get to that. I will get to that. You said that the four or five claims that I made about be twelve with passionate.
False. I've already pointed out three of the things that you got run out of the five and you were the one that like is recommending telling people what to eat. I am a combative trainer and my facts in this. These are the three that doesn't change anything about the factors I'm I'm recommending. Now The court is an Israeli. Malnutrition is ill that people get enough be twelve and that they are less likely to do that on a vegetarian, inveigle diet and there's lots studies showing that down their arms again and therefore cannot afford develop, be twelve deficiency. Absolutely I see it a neighbor ass, nearly all of the people that not the vast majority of none. I didn't say that the vast majority about forty percent or mediators- you reference, you didn't rough.
This, not only because there are more mediators in the general migration that has nothing to do with the fact that the debtor mediators and get him are not while I'm not arguing where we ve got all of these studies, about whom assisting nine out of ten reviews that have shown higher home assisting levels in regions drone vegetarian leads us to the point that it made last summer's I'll, never get forever. So did when you reference there. I am sorry you didn't linked to the study you linked to an article from the USA about the study and that study said oddly. The research has found no isn't done. This is the opening statement of your eat. Eat book references, this study, but you fat, you didn't mention this part, The research has found no association between plasma, be twelve levels and meet poultry and fish intake, even though those food supply the bulk of Bee while in the diet, it's not because people on eating enough meat to get the be twelve taught us that it's the vitamin isn't getting absorbed. So is that so
This a backs up my claim that the safest way to get be twelve is to take a supplement now crystal decisive, sixty doc. Kynaston finish on this point: we can rebuild Azra, so your claim was people in just going got. So you agree that so I would say that it means that don't supplement and omnivores there's a lot more deficiency in right. Like it's a consistent neutron of concern leading, should be cautious about very much universally accepted right now so, but that you, even if you except the forty percent number. Even though that you said that I didn't say it and accept that via doesn't it doesn't matter whether your accepted or not? You even said that, like we should consider high levels between admission to remit, even more, but doesn't that doesn't really matter? The point is that you were saying about browsing. I spent there saying. Vitamins not giving absorbed in be twelve My point my wasn't sulphur to decide to be twelve supplement and for the job, a population in the world. That is the best recommendation, your site,
go to your doctors into a sixty dollar blood tests and test will be twelve men. You can decide whether you need to supplement on. May I masterpieces both here about. Why isn't it getting absorb if there is a higher level of vitamin, be twelve and fish and there's other factors that inhibit the absorption? So what I vow is one one likely people's conditions, but also in other areas over growth in the small intestine. So so so jobs are basically come, but we still have that We know that a year and let us go back to the argument about desire to best safest way for everyone to get me. Twelve is sick, a supplement where you say we can just spend sixty dollars and at a blood test to, but you gotta recognised in the world Not everybody can afford slowly, so the safest way to get be twelve.
Where do you read me or not, is to get taken between up and we know the surest way lets you solid agree on. That's the surest way surest way for sure. But then, when you ve got studies, it show you. No. Eleven percent of omnivores have be twelve depletion versus seventy seven percent of vegetarians. Ninety two percent of europeans- you know that's with using transparency, and which is a much more sensitive marker, be twelve deficiency than serum, be twelve, which is really problematic, and then you have nine. Ten comparisons of Homer Sistine that found higher levels of Homer Sistine invented. Erin, is an omnivores and high levels in compared to vegetarians and homeless Sistine is also more sensitive. Marker than serum be twelve. Thirty, four stages it be twelve deficiency and serum be twelve. Only go down. Arranged in the fourth and final stage of be twelve deficiency. So these other studies
that I share it. On the last show, we are looking at hollow transcribe element, which is the most sensitive marker, be twelve depletion, not technically deficient See at that point, and then you have homer Sistine mouth melodic acid that are more sent less sensitive than hollow transcribe element, but more sensitive than term be twelve. Ok. Can you bring up slide? Fifty four, please And I need to show you so, nor any of you got all the facts wrong so far about be twelve at my claims, you said that they were all false and they want by every claimed that I made so far was backed up by science, and you have admitted that you made mistakes so these issues like this is your slide right. This is because Here's how I can show these hand, picking these studies to make his claim you so that ninety percent of regions, where deficient in Let us read what it says is between a depletion among animal omnivores. Vegetarians divisions begins now we're.
Remember that most people are probably listening: verses, walk outside Zack, I sell visions. Ninety two percent. It says seventy seven vegetarians. Seventy seven percent and omnivores eleven percent be twelve depletion, but that study It was more like forty percent of depletion in another diagnosed aboard, I'm I'm, not China, competitor. Ok, I'm just trying to say your case by using the study is that nine tubes buildings are deficient and be twelve anonymous, notation targeted, debated, but I'm alone, ok, whatever the nomination of regular, but I'm not gonna pick apart. This study I agree with, is that ok Can you just go to the next slide? Please crests of slide. Fifty five, that this is from the study This is from sixteen years ago, by the way and a very small start from sixteen slide. Show that his hand, picking the data that uses- and this is why go back to the fact that its about interpretation of the totality of average
and you can't we rely on some. It's not nutrition expert hand, picking studies to suit the bias so in sub. This is what is that in subjects who did not consume vitamins The levels were walk reset right, love Percent omnivores, seventy percent- and so I'm degree like if you couldn't get be twelve. Any value It incorporates mom offers into diet that, but let's look at some other studies are slide. Fifty six. Only each choosing a few I'm shut certainly there in my favor, I'm not saying that regions then law between levels? Could somebody would supplement but sought you I'm, showing you hand, picked a study from sixteen years ago side, fifty six from this is for a new social, two thousand eighteen with twice the sample size of one two eight zero people now know is going to be taught supplement. The studied markers indicate agenda, sufficient Cabal women's status, independently of the diet, preferences lactose over vegetarian or weaken slide. Fifty seven,
now? This is a study that looked at runners in May of two. Thousand nineteen really current, and it feels like you might not have the most current data, because you said to me in your email that you'd this neutral, there's only one part of what you do, and you have lots of other things that you're doing right so site fifty seven. This is comparing visions, vegetarians and Omnivores and these are runners, yarn and recreational run rotation want. Yet all three group showed an adequate biomarker status of be twelve related parameters and then flight. Fifty eight, it would be and this one only backs up my point about victims, but also and plant based eaters, but also that some news better to divide him be twelve that's a supplement uses of videos. Omnivores was higher can The non supplement uses and a high proportion of non citizens had beat all parameters outside the reference range reload. So again, that's more evidence.
That people it's a good idea to supplement and general does just have higher levels and often consensus recommendations optical over fifty, you have lower engines The water cycle, vitamin anyway the abbot after fifty you lose intrinsic factors are, you can absorb. Was much right about whether or not does not dangerous to have higher level so you're, not gonna. Look you yeah! That's a good thing to supplement period right! the regulations are every single thing that I sat in the B. Twelve payment is true and backed up by so doing neighbouring on his line. Fifty nine for me for king it totality of evidence, let's look at more evidence totally but again, I I'm not point. Those resources outside is not more. I'm saying that you hand picked a study where reed and I'm from pick a study. James theres many studies here, not retirement while they were not taken vitamins- and I agree so we agree people on plant based diet, environment
for not then be twelve hostilities, and we agree that most people are getting better supplement and anyway it just indirectly through animals fair enough fair enough of you follow the die that these animals wrong with original remote to metrology. Prism and again, I would say: look if you want to eat ninety five cent plan and you don't know how com and it is for them to supplement animal diet would be twelve is a rare thing, none metabolic casual with carefully Lala, because it is a law of a lot but much brown what its lower. But it's not. Grab, because a lot of soil is deficient in cobalt and county to consume the call about to manufacture the be twelve in the environment. So it's more of a side effect of mineral and neutral. If I shall also urban respect, not for pigs and chickens and of soda begins, have higher homo Sixteen levels than omnivores not attempt comparisons found higher homo. Sixteen levels in vegetarians and omnivores and higher levels in visions and vegetarians,
Ryan prevalence of hyper, whom assisting it's almost anemia among vegetarians may actually be higher than that among non vegetarians, already diagnosed with heart disease. So that's nine of ten comparisons, that's not hand. Picking one study- that's nine out of ten comparison is that have been. On this topic right and the outlet you said before, we shouldn't just one remark, as we should have the outcomes right. Our companies that are leaders in the region versions with higher who were sitting levels, do not have increased risk of cardiovascular disease or diabetes or death from those or from cancer. I didn't make the claim Do, for us are less than thirty, I'm so that guy we're talking about be twelve in assisting being marker, Brian Islands and Chris I'm showing that you pig to study from two thousand sixty which have a very small sample size that was nine out of ten comparisons right there, nobody awnings Eddie than outside EU body. I am saying that when you came to be twelve all of this
that I made in the film are true- and you said that they were patently false- and you were wrong- I didn't Come on mom like now. Listen I've come in here beside it already know, I don't wanna meet your shoulder correct right, because I've come in here and people saying all. What are you going to say too that debunk crested not debunk the film he made? misrepresentations about claims and he got things factually wrong certainly seems to have gotten in factually wrong that animals, particularly cows, are not given be twelve supplements. He's We seem to have gone factually wrong that at least some of the Bee twelve, the people would be able to get in the past by God. Water and soil and forty cents regional advisory role and the best way to get be twelve is the supplement. So he got I'm still another kind of Diana grinders finnish placement on your big you're wrong. So so the thing is, I have proven that he got three or four things factually wrong
I bought Rita right and I am a combative instructor. Ok, I've heard that right. Historical blunders saying I'm putting myself now. I understand I'm not like a super intelligent die when you are so you are very intelligent. I've said that before and when you did, as you did, research on these very important subjects when you acquired a lot of data, so this is what people do when you go to school. I mean it's like the difference in Germany, educated, not educated is not whether or not they go to a specific plus a total, its, whether they absorb the information and when they study and by Mercedes studied a thousand hours before the famine. Three thousand sense that you're you're, obviously agitated. You understand what you're talking So so you got things factually wrong about twelve zero. So the people listening a watching. Do you really want to put the interpretation of the data in the hands of someone just got so many things wrong about be twelve. Well, here
these wrong about your assertions about the I may not like it aims at times there still stand that vegetarians and regions have much higher rates of the twelve depletion or deficiency then omnivores the Box of a certain measure of momentum. It or not. It was awkward, but they dont worry about a diagram. Everyone agrees that, like there's no disagreement remedies turns, and only one over fifty and moat. Like the same, it's. What, in your outward disputing the safest way to get be twelve? Is this like a supplement is the best way because it is authorised way to get be twelve, but it's not necessary for many people right for people that can afford tests, which is normally the works like you'll really was in Amerika in a nice like conditioned room, and we know we ve got cause and we drove here we can afford to go to the doktor like the best way to get be. Twelve. Is to take a supplement period and you're wrong, if you think otherwise,
If you can afford you're sure if you can afford us we're going out with you, but we're gonna get. But if you have loves island states around the world are home. That's expensive, right! Here's the thing, if you diet. That gives you the ample amount of beet. Well, then you don't need is a potential new supplement. Short you are saying is that blood tests are expensive, so you should take an expensive supplement. Now, the not expensive visuals not like two. If you buy a box like two dollars a year, but No, I'm not a failure by embalmed hours a year if we're lucky buying resigned Could I ask you what you want to know if you ve got it, but the fit the triggers you're gonna, like you'd, have to split it with a bunch of people just like the years worth of supply, bracelets scrite. So certain of the argument is that Sudan has also shown into the world I've. Also too, Maxie. I forgot you hook. A lot of people are. I have also shown that, in the study that you presented in your ear to ear book stated that, like they want
hoping as well from our boys, I'm not saying, does not be driven out of the box and also we have to remember one last thing: the be twelve the appeal getting an animal products. It was supplemented in the first place in some and not in a vast majority on fish. Knotted grass fed not- and I shall not as much in the reliance boss majority of animal products, the people reading beater over supplement I'm just saying the safest way to get between his thirty supplementing the vast majority of true. Yet even A majority of people are eating while caught fish and the I don't know how many animals are actually getting, those supplemental wrangles, all of the jug and all the chickens or the chicken. That's too chicken is only seconds or omnivores they're, not fed omnivorous. Its wrangles, part lesser free range chickens. Have you give it ever see a chicken fuck up a mouse, its pre stunning? Heather carnivorous little monsters, then chickens.
And when you get em and you get those eggs and the eggs or like a bore up really dull, yellow those are animals. Reading grain, only those right vegetarian chickens that not what they want to eat what they want to eat. Worms and are living in a narrow that right in their natural. That happens. Only dont need to have some limitations. This is sort of argument against vegetarian diets for chickens really is not Those aren't really supposed to eat that way and feed lot for beef. We love to be exact, undeniable degree, suddenly they're coming at the protein driving Chauvinist party in memory of light than now, and I set out as we have plenty of time from outside. Twelve, you made some excellent points in need, definite cleared up. What was what was, misrepresented riot genocides. Really why I really appreciate having me on because the you guys did like a three hour debunk right and there was just a lot of things: factually
and there's more than I can point out. Ok, let's get relics exhorted appreciative beyond the modulation entered my. I appreciate you being a really appreciate Chris, almost as much as we disagree, I really appreciate you coming on and giving me the opportunity in keeping us Let's talk about and on an ongoing like emotionalism landline majority on people and made a hundred times you gotta do is get it. So you don't talk about protein and guess what issues are no stones are also just red meat and dairy thing outside it. To our. Whether now read me back, are you yeah? We never really clear that up. What can I do? to read and write and go with protein, but little It's finished that Bulgaria's. We really should finish. Then we can always Angela Protein consumption, sure proteins. Can we along discussion line everything is going to happen here. So we can talk about. Read me. I've taught showing that, like some of the individual things like he mine, for example, are shown to be pro inflammatory and by the way just took to back you up
Sera slice pro inflammatory necessarily correlated with poor health, could sometimes things that provide I'd nation only about how should I know it already has a positive reactions, hermetic cosmetic stress, so that things like exercise your exercise, Ukraine, your whole misis right shore, sauna, the same thing where he'll sort of trying show that fish in our view, held the timid over example, your say what I can tell them every bad Bulgaria that will get that bullets devoted enemy, wiping renegades bad fortune, America's one of things. Ok then Redmond just like You mind rash, artists, inflammatory, but here associated with cardiovascular risks and that he might is found in meat and eating plants in a healthy diet. Turn it off citizens, absolutely their evidence that eating meat by itself is associated with cardiovascular disease. Nobody ever has eaten meat. By itself, what about these non? Our library, but was now
those guys, the canaries and the call minor, there's no research on that then, why on earth? That's one of my people just eating army diet. That does not mean every both agree, likely less despair create a false dichotomy. Trust if you're, if there was a cat, like all animal parts I noticed carnival bags analyse stuff, and then there was a fully plant based. Diet suddenly would be twelve, which one would you advocate if it false dichotomy. I'd probably chick picked a plant dire. Probably, although I would be concerned about nutrient deficiencies yeah, I I've never advocated for cars. The customer diet, I said as much harder, alas, show vessels. Something about plans for plants are awesome right, so we agree on that day is never had anything wrong. What all he's ever said was that eliminating all animal products from your die is probably not healthy. Unless you follow a very strict, routine
Will you make sure that you have all your bases covered, nutritionally that's what Chris said from the job and you know it I would extend that and to say that I don't think there is strong evidence suggesting that including some animal products in your whole foods plant based diet is harmful. Canada's? Where would that's where we seem to have interested? And I even said that nobody Levant very tremendously could be five percent for some someone who's just eating mostly plant stay there eating some shellfish and organ meet for the nutrient density or you have someone who eats more animal products and depends on their needs. Are I'd? Go with that? First toughen. The second off, but just a back up what Joe does slight sixty two: Do I mentioned this earlier, but we didn't put a slide on, but I think the granitic down enormous really listening, so I can maybe try to describe it to people
in posts brandy, inflammatory responses to a modern versa, traditional meat meal. So this especially measures is that Hungary is Kangaroo versus booth, lag laggard beef as opponents. I guess so you'd recognise that marks and see our Peter enough Alpha and I'll sex, ah inflammatory markers. So I just want to point. That Macgyver you're gonna need not yours and plants and you're gonna eat the rest of it from animal products. I think that wild caught out and kangaroo meets the fact that would be the way to go by far Why just make it turns out that just to show you this look at that is about off the information roughly coming from the wild caught. Makes sense because women most the time we're dealing with wheat when you're dealing with beef you do with his grain fed unhealthy and
but when you talk about why you beef? That is, that's it dying animal I mean if you saw a person whose muscle tissue looked like a why You stay goodbye by Bro, you gotta, get our fuckin diet I mean really, but if you saw like you know an athlete, if you looked at and fleets, muscle tissue would look like a piece of help. Most likely right, look very lean and healthy, run, dance, so I want to point out that one that shows cover things that shows that meat does create information, to see this on grass fed meat. Now so close to this, a feed No, but I even if it match the other, the Kangaroo me resourcing information, yeah, I'm somebody like you said. I agree if you're gonna be animal foods. I think wise timing lies the law of Plum foods, with that there was an overt right by
the only thing that animal feeds usually allow plants where there's also a lot of benefits to it in terms of fibre in terms of Europe, the Bio Micro, bad yeah. There's there's a lot of benefits. Having these fermented vegetables as well in own things like Kim she in and having things provide you with good probiotics. The all the feelings of this great benefit to a lot of plant foods and people on plant by science just end up doing naturally more fibre fundamentally differ in five around. If you look at like the paralympic period, you be looking like, maybe a hundred grams of fibre hungry. Fiber into envy and plenty of on publicize get more fibre than people in another diet. His lungs are eating healthy, as we both agree. I s eyes. Hasta impedes on registry feather even invasions, invite turns and all the studies I still getting more five it despite the fact that I
you, and I would agree that not even the healthiest I overall overall figure overall completely plant based me. The only people that have put forward in there. That would be my range life, the most finally be a my range body mass index. So we started well yeah but body my sent us Our group is not a great motives, are surely one right them exactly obese right yeah. This there's a lot of nonsense to agree generally that, if, if you look at people were on a vegetarian or deegan Diet and compared with people on the standard american diet in- They're gonna write amply wealthier right, but it s also about American die right. Someone is eating healthy plates of of broccoli Kalen also has a piece of grass fed me. That's what I want Tata Motorcycle Tony Blair's wow I conscious die, and I totally agree. Of course you're gonna see Mark is like, for example, the longest study on a paleo diet right there had a two year follow up
and they had improved? It lost body fat they and improved blood markers. What was. Interesting, as they were told to eliminate dairy till you cut out. Very they were told her reduce their amount of or cut out completely process comforts like white flour and sugar and oldest other stuff. They were told to increase their fruits and vegetables and they were told to increase, meat consumption and the dot improve health markets all across the board, but now most interesting as at the end of the two years? What they found was that people are not stuck with the meat recommendations, so they kept them meet recommendations the same. They got out a process, junk food right, transparency, stuff that you'd all agree. We should get out of it. Diet right. They took out milk out their diet and they increase the amount of comfort. So it's very clear that the benefit did not come from increase meat consumption. It came from increased harmful consumption or eliminate. I do, and I think that will benefit is decreasing, bullshit right
as a twofold Van Ryan is cut out. Things are inflammatory and you putting things around two inflammatory. You cannot things that alone antioxidants. You incorporate things that a hind antioxidants, so that was that the major, if it wasn't from this increase meat consumption. Ooh saying it is from increase meat consumption me now understand with the benefit of a paradigm, is going in a more hopeful plan right and I think that's what everyone says they ideas. You eliminate processed foods, your eliminate sugar, I will eliminate these things that are just filled. But we know that it's not just that. It's a twofold different when incorporate hope hampers. Does the opportunity, CASA, your replace, YO, YO Getting rid of prominent, in my personal opinion, based on the consensus, your replacing both highly processed foods and animal feed, and your incorporating more whole plumbers and thy is the sign of a consensus, is see a predominant plant based. I owe you could say the same thing about the benefits you see with vegetarian and begin studies can
hang with standard my dry either at removing a lot of the crap. I bring problem about studies, got, comparing the neutral Bordighera through a hole through promised. I wouldn't have them, so we have to fur and when we then we have to rely on experts, are experts in the field right. We don't. We don't turn to two crescent. Ok, can you tell us more about nutrition and energy and urology than all of these experts. I think that I agree vision. Just listen to me, but I dont think its genuine this to suggest that there is a consensus that a whole food plant based diet is a better choice. Then a plant based. That also contains some animal products. I vehemently, however, we have no, That is on that and we probably won't. Unfortunately, in the near future, because price a long drawn out comes out of line afforded years, though not so we agree with its heart. Like again, I've said before that we should,
the vast majority of my colleagues from hope, I'm foods. I think there's enough in the literature to show and an economy of new and I got it recognizes that complete evading dies, the health of all life stages, including for athletes. I think that there is sufficient evidence your hundred sent, but I'm not. When people they should be doing that, I'm saying you can do whatever they want, but I think we both agree that people should be getting out junk food right. Soda and transport on both by the way on transport. So do I ask you in the beginning, in the show what and where your position months, because that's the fundamental question for me is that is this question that we're talking about right now, which is is there are sufficient evidence to suggest that you know everybody most People, whatever you want to say, should be on a hundred percent or even ninety. Five percent plant based diet, verses plant based diet that contain some animal products, and my argue in all along has been no. There is not sufficient evidence rival, yours
I think maybe you also think the completely plant, as that is likely to be neutral, deficient and all these other. Do you know? A lot of us do you know, is history, you know as a long and that's why. I think that, as I think, there's emotional ties, I think you ve mighty. History is not relevant it was one in what areas of lighting presided yourself. You said I had like birth mood and loud, but I also said that there are people ignored that there are many successful regulations and vague in Athens. You at your version of all even vote the end of one and also you didn't follow the time if consensus about pumping start, when you did it so you chose him, robotic diet and you chose a role we can always just do it. You just two innovations around I. Why did you choose those when they were based on scientific consensus, because I wasn't this was twenty years ago and I wasn't paying attention two: it have traveled around the world and you got sick and you attributed to the diet, which I am involved, I didn't attributed to the dying.
That's what I don't even know I were talking, might my experience because it is relevant because it shows that, like I don't know why you have your vegetarian. Maybe it was like animal rights reasons. Maybe you feel bad for going back to eating me so not only to field privilege the reason that Unita three then you need. The film is because you ve got a massive business selling supplements and protein powders and giving diet advice so often that I may ass this I make very very little money is selling supplements genes. And I'm not I'm out of illness. It's basically convenience for my patients that unless you're saying overriding, my business is basically training people right, but being a clinician. There is now I have. I dont profit from you know, selling an like animal product either agent you doing directly because you advise this diet. So the film is very bad for you personally, because if people believed the film which, like the defence,
health agency. They review the found better care about like this myth that we should in exactly this. Where's, our ancestors, not the real, nearly eight that way, but they don't care about that method. Cat at what is going to be better for war, fighter effectiveness and cut the healthcare costs of our military. So they looked at the science independently. You think they're, like the difference. How legacy is full of regions? so you have a film is as neither here nor there for me, but that's what we're here for That's what now? What I mean is that the fairies and that I'm here is because reason that I came when Joe invited me in a pretty little probably tell you that it took a few invitations to get me here. It's is just to Prague, provide the other side of the the view here, because it materially affects me in any way believe me, I've got lots of other things. As I told you in the email rungs on nutrition, or even like my nutrition team, they spent full time
either consulting early athletes or military personnel or that dig into the research chief signs of eyes are eight hours a day. All he does is dig into the latest research. So what you can't you come unto Jos, progress and you're supposed to like people exposed to believe that you are the best person to good use. About much analyses news about totality reference. We agree, but you are suggesting, people should listen to your interpretation of the evidence when you get things factually wrong people, should make up their own minds, and indeed I don't even know how to run the evidence that we that we have provided, and you don't know how to read a basic forests plot and is my winked because you're not defied and you're. Not yet I am again I'm not a specialist in nutrition. I would have liked to have bring. Should I do have brought David actually signs adviser who knows, hundred times more about nutrition and either and you're coming on here telling people what to eat. You said yourself: you're, not export nutrition, and you don't know how to read the nutritional data. Let's talk about some of the claim, sucker
about protein about programme about the film is develop protein so that further we should get it right. Ok, can I just just I understand your position and I am sorry for getting worked up like that. Don't look at me like an attorney joint interrogate you, but I feel, like I spent a lot of I'm turning into research. I had to do the research checked, unchecked and checked again. I haven't we such check to make sure that it was not cherry picking. There is reflective of the preponderance of evidence, but who was checking it where they people, who were not advocates of a whole food plant based diet exclusively or where they ve been up all night cause. All of the experts in the film are people who are clearly aligned with this. That perception. Under view them, as are aligned with the consensus and no an over, half of the line. I thought you just agree that there is not a consensus that a hundred percent plant based diet is better than dieting clue
a lot of plants from some antibiotics. So where were the experts that would represent that point of view? There's another hammered home. Yet another reserve plant based agree. It doesn't have to be a hundred percent. The films had planned, both diet Now I'll tell you why we only interviewed visions of the athletes right, the ones to actually spoke on screen and Arnold is not forgotten. He doesn't drink, everything's is for babies and is cut down meat by eighty percent, though People, I'm in no name, is not on Zan billion he's on a largely plan based on its a bit of seafood, is that what you're, the only legal entities exile, so all the reason that we only put and by the way we interview long codeine and rub off- and I can get to that as well. If you want, because there Dan proposes loftily faces. Are there not the claims of the note? You know where I'm talking about scientists who published these new, who are on the team rice papers,
I have shared down a guy, like you, like me, interacts who are funded by the industry, and we can get no, not neutral lens, disingenuous to claim that all of the research that that I have shared not as our is fun industry do you want it will. I can ignore your claim that, like the recent study, it just came out and we were getting off track. The recent food is came out. That said, that read me and process. Me is totally fine right like you really want to go with that, but it to me if you like, you, don't have your finger on the pulse honestly, I'm not gonna be room I think you probably know all about you say about that study. What monitoring study the it is said that readily this in your direct, sorry, ok so internal medicine, the day before the film came out, six studies exonerating read me in processed meat or from the same company, but apparently giving recommendations or guesswork exponent. A neutral rex and companies like that are not the ones that give public recommendations on what people should be the number one
when we talk about this in the film with exponent new directions like another experiment. So if you the recommendations, first of all, a Frank, her Frank here, now the chair of an already turkey. What will it place said? The boy husband or recommendations that adult should continue to their red meat consumption habits is highly irresponsible Walter. What it said is the most egregious abuse of data he's ever see. And if you want to follow the recommendations that we could put ups slide ninety two, so they did the same in two thousand seventeen for the sugar industry, so there was a matter analysis in the annals of mutual aid. They you mean the Newt. Everything comes out better, so it was so are broadly Johnston. Is the director and co founder of new direction, the first author of the paper that we're talking about for red meat that the judge? Exonerated read me apparently on unprocessed misses the same company says this. At present, there seems to be no reliable evidence indicating that any of the recommended daily, caloric thresher
calls for sugar and take our strongly associated with negative health effects, so they did a matter analysis saying that worry about your interview, sugar at all. That was what then for losses occurs when it came to her and then two years later, the day before the camp get filled him out and you really think that's a coincidence. Do you think that the so let me tell you something the of our email subscribers. You know the email address of the person that opens and views are emails, the most from the beef Chekhov Programme, and I ve been doing that since we started so decide from a unless they look at when the film is coming out, and you don't you think it's a coincidence that the day before us, the film comes they release a paper exonerating. Read me in, and cancer. And the same sort of yielding to bind the neutral study about redmain cancer than to be fur evil. So that a buy into that conclusions about sugar because they were I'll, tell you who their repelled by go so to financial support for that
Paper was funded by the technical, is cohesion listen to. This sounds great. The technical committee on dietary carbohydrates of I'll S, Eye North America and I as high as the international Life Sciences. Mr sounds pretty lodge right. So it's me does include Coca COLA, her she company, Pepsi Company and rebel, and a bunch of others. Folks, looking out for you best interests that sugar? Ok, I thought it would be a problem if that was the only so You just don't you just you claimed all this recent study and I want to see again no disrespect you're busy with lots of other things. You run a successful business, consulting people selling stuff I get you don't have to. You you were unable to read a basic forest plot, look at statistical significance and constant intervals. I just don't think that you're the one to interpret the data. So the reason you don't have you you haven't seen the hundreds of really respected. Scientists have come out saying this new to wreck study and by what is an investigation into the
rules of internal medicine because of this for accepting this stuff from neutral ex, but if you're going to accept them. Its analysis on red meat and on processed meat for cancer. Then you ve also, go to accept the two thousand. Seventeen studied matter. Analyses if you accept the source, if you'd send resources on the Saint James Nutritional value only not only met analysis that showed no association between, read me and set, and heart disease or cancer. That would be the one I'm first, I'm talking about the one that you cited, you made out, This is like a sign. Second of all and pointed out, the funding industry funded research is forty, eight times more likely right ituri, an arrogant backs that dairy one by the way do you know that when they did, they match analysis they they doubled and tribute and quadrupled up, because when they looked when the They met analysis that, unlike the matter now seize the moment, has included the studies multiple times you don't say,
they took into account each time, and so when the industry floods, the scientific research with their funded studies again, funny story doesn't have varying other studies in those same conclusion, adding those eyes if it's an additional studies that we know it's so, but if your in funds studies and only to decide if you run into a beef industry or dairy industry. Are you going to put out studies the on in your favour? Not right and you also you don't have to use Bennett, and so what you do is like if you want to mix beef look, but if you like such a fat look, come ok or economic classroom. Can you can you can switch things around the city to make it look at if you wanna like look eggs and, for example, I dont want to get like the contender three out about about restaurants hundred fat, but if you, if you give, if you go from eggs a week to twelve hours a week. It doesnt raise your served cholesterol. So that's how they did the studies, but of knowledge. We twenty Eureka does increase, because this link to cholesterol, plotter, so lobby
history does. Is it tricks you it does? Madame when you look at eggs and outcomes like cardiovascular, disease. You don't see more looter we're going out. I was just making a point. The industry funded studies sway the results of the Manor House back, got something us back done with the sugar industry and its done with it was done with tobacco God, I'm not. Comparing the the amount of increased risk of cancer from Thailand without was never claimed, was made. There was the playbook that his ears by the drug industry by the meat industry by the sugar in the sugar industry by the dairy industry. So either though your film came out in these studies, came out right before you film. It's kind of proving your point that this same company that try to exonerate the sugar industry is also going to accept that began a site that is otherwise I'm not going to site that got them the reason I think because, like you said you're so busy on many other things is I just don't think that your fingers on the
that was not the only study, and I know it. I know it's not. I know it's downstairs by any other met analyses two thousand ten fifteen. We can look at them, you know if the Lester, Ok, we're gonna do that. On the one hand we ve been: let's look at those study search so but agenda funding there, including studies, a fund by industry, and so, unless you can pass those out and say is That really is aim. We can rely on a study in order. However, strong, I said that I said that that you would really to look at the way in which a study is designed to see if it was a viable, and you also have to replicate the studies you know, like studies have to erupt, and so what I M saying is so our. Just finished. I lost my knowledge of their shares. Many studies want it again. You can show as much as you want. You can't prove you not hang picking them too to suit your bias. You are the one the quoted this study that it shows the your finger on the pulse, because hundreds of, like top scientists, have written letters,
we are joined in the same letter to the thousand miles and asking for those things to be retracted and is now castigation into the hours of internal medicine. Yet you are saying: no solution doesn't prove nothing has been doesn't remember. I am. I was aware that controversy and a new kind of on call time. Reed forest place not having been one. I just controversy is not surprising if red meat has been demonize for as long as it has been, and then, study comes out which exonerated that it would be entirely expected that there would be controversy. I heard that study was funded by about cases put up slide. Ninety three, just as just to show that rights are just not just me saying that some in the sun scientist who betrayed me airlines didn't report passport in July, so that not only because remember most people listening scientists who discredited meet guidelines didn't report pass food industry ties the lead researcher.
Rarely see Johnston said he was not required to report is pass relationship with a powerful industry trade group under what that trade group is. But if you scroll down five continents, Jim there's outside should start. Now I didn't tell you in the first one, the sugar one. It was that Pepsi or supple that they make a fact that the main may make a nonprofit with a fancy sounding right and then they back at all with industry funding same with the meat study that that's. Why don't we stand? Why he'd use it? If you were being objective, we are using all of the other studies. But why name this one is, though, it's got validity, because so, if you feel like they dig, concoct this study and released it right before you're found. That does not rivals. Not. I think it's likely that herbs tied into the background, but it doesn't matter whether it is I'm showing the two to two took to present. That study is evident when the consensus of the scientific researchers is against. That study is calling for an investigation is aspirate been retracted, the co author of the
people whose pot the leadership team new directs he's the vice chancellor of Dean and agriculture, science as taxes. I M right taxes. I'm is partnered with the beef Chekhov Programme and its partners. It also discussed in the New York Times slide. Ninety four and actually does there's. A lot deepen not actually goes back to the brazilian government, but letting slide. Ninety four I voted for years causing about research groups. It discounted risk red meat, has ties to program partly backed by beef industry science, so this doesn't necessarily mean what they're saying is incorrect, and this is where it gets slippery rikers if they found things that happen to be correct, and they release it, but they release it. For me, should a company that has said
things such as the shooting area, Charles Handpicked, which studies have included on analysing the two Kazi vat of appointing a time. Does rooms explained this to get to your point Chris, you agree with the founding with with the the conclusion of that study and you think that the evidence points of theres, many studies that point to the idea. Red meat is not. In fact, the culprit in the culprit is when you're, looking at these epidemiology studies that you're looking at the overall diet of these people and ask them, do they eat me, you're not ask them what is the quality of the food they eat? So I agree that conflicts of interest, her problem, and I you know that the editorial that was publishing animals along side of the study said This is sure to be controversial, but it's based on most comprehensive review of the evidence today, because that reviews inclusive those who seek to dispute it would be hard pressed to find appropriate avenue
so in her who wrote that doesn't matter, analyses had asked studies covering millions of participants over thirty four years there are several other mechanisms, analyses that has been done over the past few years, so the best way to show these I've got him in a Google dark. So two thousand seventeen, let's see if I can Give you the title will later something content: pray review of the relationship between red meat, consumption and cardiovascular risk quote from that study? The review concluded quote. Recent findings demonstrated that, despite the presence of he, my own incarnate teen red meat, does not significantly increase cardiovascular risk when it is assumed. Recommended doses you have to face
in fourteen met analysis of thirteen studies there it is again these are this one. Jamie is. Called association between total processed red might mean consumption or cause cardiovascular disease, heart disease mortality- and this is a good example of what you were saying Joe. There was this as a slight increase association between red meat emption and cardiovascular marked mortality and, in the end, no, significant associations observed between any type of meat and and heart disease mortality. Results of the present that analysis indicate that process meat consumption could increase mortality. These results should be interpreted-
caution? Do the high heterogeneity observed in most of the analyses, as well as the possibility of residual confounding, meaning healthy user bias? Lippy It is a matter now set of eleven studies of red meat, consumption and heart disease concluded the quote. The current literature data does not support the existence of a clear relationship between a large intake of read me an increased risk of my a cardiologist ischemia, and then this is one of the largest it was done. Let me give you the title of this to me: read and processed meat consumption and risk of incident coronary heart disease that should bring it up. That's by Misha at all conclusion, consumption of processed meat, but not red meat is associated with higher incidence of heart disease and diabetes.
These in our so there's a bunch of matter, analyses that had been done over the years that reached the same conclusion and wicked you know look at the same same. This is for heart disease, but there are also some for cancer. So it's not just that study There are many others rise. While there are men of another man analyses and there are many houses on the other side, so you can present studies here of the people. S new, thereby had analyses on the other sat right. Certainly present. You can prevent the data for the people listening and appears like the proponents of. Is that what you're guidelines diet, the northern alliance etc. The fact that no and I fought cholesterol, the nor indicted for the mouth carbohydrates for normal people then I am in line with the consensus for cod. Lies live said, a range of carbohydrates could be,
Have you read the alarm saying, as you know, in alignment with the scientific consensus and you claim that we carry back in the film right, but you have picked studies to back up your bias, not to mention that we ve pointed out that the studies in those mademoiselle- some of heavily funded by industry, not saying you should troll those out, but you don't have the wherewithal to assess the bodies in the matter analysis, because you point out yourself, you can't even we forest plot. So its conclusions right here. Conclusions in writing, but has not looked at the actual data. So you haven't been able to establish when I was like, spend the first thousand hours. I would look at the whole paper and then I would look at each author and I would dig into each offer to see where that that funny was from and I'm telling you that the industry is finding studies to spray things.
Their favor, and you point that shows you don't have anything. There is no doubt about that. Why? Why did you point to those last time you? Why did you point to an industry funded by everyone as before, labour law and wondered why why point out in the new text study you know when Erebus alien, valid, the scientist way way way not clearly and valid. If it wasn't representative of the scientific evidence that they hand picked the studies that are including they used a poem it, they used a great methods do not great method. I knew and it was- and you think that's appropriate for assessing food rollin. Translating this I'm nutrition organizations riotous, including while very fear, is not a sign of Consensus So what is to be National Academy of Johnny? It just basically use the methodology that wasn't appropriate for looking at what,
it's just the same with the third Torino and the child, who studies that the what they were looking for could never have been found. The association between saturated fat classrooms can never been founded based on the methodology used, but if we do not believe that we still got the protein and I will be higher, that's good boy would sit so so there It's absolutely true have never claimed that there aren't studies, show correlating red meat with regular and shouting out. So you show the ones that you I'd never have claimed. That and I've said, though, those studies are high, problematic for all of the reasons that we have talked about on the line shone on previous- shows healthy user bias. Problems of data collection, food frequency questionnaires, relative verses, absolute risk, confounding, like you know not looking at physical activity in the biggest can founder of all, not looking at diet, quality so
but you ve got a lot of diet quality. Do you like to use my lawns work, which has never been published, which obviously was building what unites are not used? Matt lawns recorded luck and action with dyke? What I'm talking about food patterns like healthy food pattern, he turned the Newton Dunn's tonight, a hundred density, which is a part of dire quality. You have referred to matter lawns work where we're going weakened happy is talked about that. I'm tired, you know, that's how it works with I'm still talking about the research on read me being problematic, because it doesn't consider the overall diet Paramount, but again your views. First of all, you don't have the wherewithal to interpret the scientific evidence, which is very kid. Don't understand forest plots there. How can you be? We? You recognise that you have to look at the totality of evidence. You have got a digging and look at whether things appointing you yourself said I am not an expert in nutrition and you I'm not either
which not only know everything having this discussion. Honestly, I wish some real experts, and we can do that. You and I can- and I reckon you can you can point on your side who you think the experts are and our point on our side. We think the experts are not only I'd, say size really to me. It's not really. My position like I think your position is a lot better than to stand american dire, The opposition is really not the carnivores royal, your position, yeah, that's the opposite. The your position, those in defence of your film, I've been on how these amounts to his critique and how do you think, I'm doing so far bow would be twelve was a home run for sure. Why think? There's lots of other things, but whether thing about wage still haven't, really shown whether or not there is evidence that is seen us the problem with all this stuff. You're dealing with these epidemiology studies, it's it's so hard to figure out. What's what I agree, what What what are these people eating working people? Are they drinking? Are they doing drugs like what
what is the overall health quality based. I agree and that's why you look at how much of it is based on the guides and that's why you look at scientific consensus, could just bring up slide one you agree with Edward Dispute, would he say about scientific consensus for Germany that you're not unlimited scientific consensus? My my general Terry recommendations. We are probably some aspects of bananas Spent but more generally, I'm inclined I don't think that's where you think the scientific incense Chris. What do you think the scientific consensus is when it comes to deter recommendations, its change a little bit in the past few years deftly was low fat, although that is changing a little bit. Hydras recognition of different fat different may have different effects, etc. Would be limiting read me would be limiting, our trade fad, limiting cholesterol eating a lot of
plants and limiting lit limiting sugar besides, I am. This is scientific insight, leghorns on other place. What is that based on? What do you think? That's based on that's based on yeah, mostly observational research and then some mechanistic studies, our cities, but even our cities. If you're, comparing unlike some the studies that are cited, for example, in David Gormans papers. Their comparing standard american diet with a plant may say so in in a random in Accra. So retrial randomize trial has not comparing apples to apples but anyways. To get back to your question, I would say about half of what I of when I recommend is consistent. If we use the factors that I just said, eating whole foods and not eating processed and refined.
Limiting sugar that the are areas where I differ? Are red meat, saturated fat? But not always, I think third, that's individual and pens on how people actually respond to saturated fats and eggs, and total fat around the running about liquors lagoons ingrained, I think, they're they can be part of a healthy If there were tolerated- and you do things like- the research- has shown a hole through plumbers- I've, as is done in Baghdad. We really getting improvements on that yeah. I think everybody. I don T think there should be more slanted american airlines. Some people I found don't do out with grain legumes, especially people digestive issues, so for them- maybe not, but I dont I've, never argued that grain
in the gums. Are you don't like I'm not up a paleo diet, paleo kind of advocate- and you pointed out lost time- is Rhonda Patrick Book talk about it, two cups that what you're booked up and there are. You pointed out by these homeric stresses that pretoria earlier, and so you know these people that talking about anti nutrients and from there a red Herring Riah, because they don't know what you're talking about and yeah it's it's really common thing and their basic it looked. The landscape of food is enormous. The landscape of dietary requirements, of of health, its enormous and energy. You talk about spending thousands and thousands of ours comin over this research can attest to the and Chris. I think you can as well mean word this a very complicated issue and in theirs, certain amount, a vile of bio variability. Different people have different physical requirements, different nutritional requirements, but I think we're too
China's zoom in on what is actually bad for you and what is actually good for you? I think we agree on. I think we all agree everyone here agrees that the? U you basically needed an amount of vegetables near diet. You need vitamins whether you get those vitamins. From supplements, I'd be twelve supplements or whether you can get it from the actual food to eat. Your certain die turn requirements and I think we're we're all in agreement on shop. I think where we disagree on his whether or not red meat is bad for you and what kind of red meat we're talking about and why in a? Why is it bad and what what is it bad when it sits loan, or is it bad when you're eating it with vegetables, which is what we're recommending in the first place. So if we're recommending that you eat it with vegetables and these vegetables do have sort of balancing effect of the negative. Specks of the perceived negative aspects, even though there is no evidence that those negative aspects when eaten by itself, because we don't really have
long term studies on carnivore, diet, people, we re think mostly wearying agreement here, you're you're, sending your film while rightness on ethnic buncher clampdown on true there's a proven with the be twelve issue. He said some things that made you look like yours, things were inaccurate and invite uninformed and he's got a bunch of other things through the poker and salaries that, with protein, let's go get broken, and so we can. I just show what the consent is. Actually there is on a diet. Yes, so can you give me a slide one, and I mention deserted about it, who show it so the World Health Organization recommends the pebbly nutritious diet based on a variety of huge origin, mainly from plants rather than animals, which you said you could agree with right, because it's like not Regan, necessarily mainly from plant, mean that their proportions.
Our question mark their burning on and then the ashes slides three would be the FDA Oda. Throughout the world for innovation and properly planned vital areas, including readers, to find this is academy of nutrition. Diabetics. Ok abruptly appropriately planned vegetarian, including in diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate and may provide health benefits for the prevention and tree of certain diseases, that's weird the appropriately planned as a weird waves, phrase and what it is and is also a load on fact, is a sort of rhetoric is sort of says like with you. If you didn't omnivorous die, it doesnt needs be programmed whatever the hell round. Yes, good point: these diets are appropriate for all states, of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood adolescence, older adulthood and for athletes, these women that you hear that are getting arrested, their babies are mountains, nourished because they're, following a vague and diet appropriately planned?
the keeper housing, are you all right said that at the beginning of the lives of the show their there, I acknowledge that there are very healthy high performing begins young people in plant based. I write If they do it right and I'm someone to take your advice, what they have to do that right and plan that would be like I think our recent yellow plan out, like I want to emphasise players their land. You gotta, have you want you? Probably you gotta, have a plan Ryan got a plan to go to the grocery store landed at the right for their. There are some nutrients that are of potentially bigger concern. I think We have added to that seven discharge to more light on the bus, what evidence so our slide. I completely agree with appropriately plan. Santos only recognise that it is always your planet, while you have between a wifi, differs is the same one, none of the slide off, I meant for omnivores too, like the Erika, we want people to be thinking about what their eat total most people reading a bunch of crap savings.
The Academy of Nutrition and dietetic, the American Heart Association and the two thousand fifty two thousand twenty dietary guidelines. Americans recommend appropriately planned vegetarian diet for improved health, that that's a statement by Frank here. Is the current chair of nutrition offered looking at plant based thoughts and controversial, health and I'm slide to is the affair, so I got the slides in the wrong order. Is the FDA out? I don't know what mess that with the don't look like my page anyway, how social liked predominantly plant based diets, region of Roddy of vegetables and fruits pulses in legal terms, which again aloft on the period I would says, is useless and minimally process thought he staple foods the evidence that such diets will prevent or delay a significant proportion. Non communicable disease. Chronic diseases is consistent, so or in pointing out here is that you're, not in line with the consensus of science and that you don't have the ability to read it.
Because that's one morning, I'm so I'm in line with pretty much everything that has been shown just just then There is only one of only one of the paragraphs that you mentioned even mentioned animal products and one and it didn't recommend excluding them entirely. So so you would point out the one you agree that predominate palm bases the way to go, and that is all Your planet appropriately vision diets can be helpful because a yes, I agree, I said as much that vision diet can be helpful on the first shot on the first thing show if their appropriating planned ban, I dont know predominantly plant based again. If you look at the plate and we see mostly plants there and then animal products then yeah. It's not citing about a dozen buys calories. I don't you. Do you agree by calories them? no sir, you're, not like the science that Erika sank consensus, I'm not in alignment with
This is not a normal predominate in your colors implants, which is the scientific consensus you're, not without redefining cholesterol and a bunch of other things he mine, but anyway, so can we get a protein because we really his fat like to defend his critique of the finance, because in all honesty I got people that watch the foam changed at all feeling better watch this podcast when he developed the film then called me a lot and I, like my new message on Instagram saying you are full of shit. You shouldn't read comments. Russia is not only that, but I am just saying like It's a shame that you have someone that doesn't really have the capability to really understand the literature coming on here. For buying into it talking smack on the film where you meant he made a bunch of factually wrong comments about this has got it affords them for sure and again I'm, not even the ones qualified like, if I'm a beating him on some arguments, what do you think you would get if you had a real nutrition expert in here
but I'm not qualify dizzy. I would like to see it. Ok, so can I just your concerns with the protein mainstream understanding? Your argument, protein quantity, fourteen quality and within protein quality, it would be the amino acid profile and digestibility. Is that fair, though those in your issues. Whether consideration or prototype, we're on our important were on the same page for what were discussing right. So I just don't know when and again not saying that it's not possible to get enough protein quantity and quality of and mix of me no asses and, if you're really on it right, but here's well planned for deferred for many others. I was well planned. Everything gets less, it's less likely that you'll get protein right on a completely vision.
Diet, without relying is on a diet that contains animal protein. It's more competent, it's not It's not my comrade what it does is, if you just don't know if you know what you're doing and I ve been you're a certain way for thirty years knew something tells me off the plate and you only eat what was left from the plate. You're gonna have a presence more companies, but exactly how we think about resources on arrival of knowledge and understood learning about- that is pretty low. In my experience, rice, now I agree and that's why Hibridean, I don't think your people need more resources to make better informed decisions about their health, about their exercise and so on. I agree: what's your position on what he said about rotating guy, so you could this. I just courting you from last time Are you you, re, probably through a law of ours, of your work has gone from free. Thousand collect, barely one hundred enough anyway, so there's just what's wrong with what you said, that it was not to turn to every single topic programme, so three ounces, You said three ounces of
ninety percent lean ground beef. Do you think the animal fat is not good for you, All of a sudden now criticism, I would say, is now approaching about what was the statement in the film cyanogen ground? Be that rejecting that for protein content The statement of the most common now is not actually does not go as nationals eighties, anywhere from an grass FED beef, which is what I advocate. There is generally leaner. Regret was waiting was specifically talking about protein now I know that's organic enterprise, so listen to lean ground beef so but but Bessie. I had said, and I might become of exact words I said, but not premature, recorded a number of time. So one cup of cook, lentils or a peanut butter Sandridge has about as much protein as three ounces of beef or three logics. That was what I said. I might be off in a word, but that was what I said: oh Christ,
as much protein, so you go on to say tat. This is of ninety percent lean ground, painful already what you did as you picked Lena beef by the, even though you don't advocate for that, you you'd you, don't the animal fat is bad. So what you do is you picked the Linas Bienvenu? What you say has twenty foregrounds approach. I'm not sure what you saw. What he does advocate for israeli beef Grass FED beef is leaner. He's too! about. What he does advocate for the does make sense, is right. Three ounces of ground lean meat, but the various the point in the film well, let me tell you more and saying that most people- don't you were saying if any horizontal felt right. I can't we're saying regular stands right. American ground behind was much writes about Warburton, a point that we have. This thing is not to say this is the best free. Three years a sailor, you re really compares the register that you eat like a peanut butter. Some people think Nora hosting it all right. I think people think that plans have no protein. The first question you get us: where do you get your protein? So I said he's got about much protein.
So you say than on by the way. I listened to your thirty minute, podcast shantytown found which came out before you came on and transport costs, and you said that and you ve sort of back this up. I don't know this happened right from one ought to go and got spread and spreading spread. But someone said you need five tablespoons of peanut butter to get the same amount of protein Didn't want world there's someone, I don't! You changed your tudor low, but when he came in the past, but when I'm we never Sandridge. I use bread to pieces of bread. How like that you would? You choose brought a bit of us. I think that's what deciding what I've done munition Ryan is pretty much more. So what you do on your part, cost you admit, the tablespoons peanut butter is foregrounds brightened about and what is four times five. Twenty.
Right and an by per USDA. How much is one piece of whole wheat, bread for five depending on the source? You look at a great honeybees of bread to so five rounds, reporting bread thought the one arms are trams, but does the USDA put five five plus five is present? Ten plus from the peanut butter is thirty. Or even on the Linas beat you chose. It was twenty four grams Why did you say you need a five tablespoons of clean about? I know how it came about because I think what you do is you take other people. What like Denise Manner and all these other people. You read their articles and you take their arguments because this topic on your site is very reflective of people's other arguments on us sites. So there was something that started where people started singing need: five tablespoons of peanut butter and in the first article, without the bread. Now I don't know why you don't include bread and when you make a sound
because most people there is not just here, but I am for a peanut butter savaging here today, to show you what two tablespoons of penal by looks like a two and a half because when I looked at it- and it was this Surprising, like She measure real tablespoon such not much peanut butter and, like some minor fitted out, has about like two and a half farm tablespoons and to peace, the bread, my bread as sex crimes, but so my dear I saw by twenty two transport in anyway, wiser red would be more like two or three grand, but nothing we showed a piece of Hawaii, but on that we're advocating eating mostly whole foods. That's a whole grant. No one is saying we even set in the film if we want to show you that we just run push plants. We said white, sugar and flat white flour, bad for you, you're, so shaded with weight gain carbohydrates from Hove resources are instituted with better lean body, mass, lower body fat percentage, nothing else but anyway, so
Don't understand why I think it is. You took that article cuz articles that spread from a topical forgot to put the bit in parentheses, about it without the two pieces of bread. She takes five tablespoons of peanut butter at four grams, a piece that's twenty, right right around what businesses are bred transgressed So why did twenty four grams of your hand picked lean beef, which you don't even necessarily like? There's no reason that you should be. Taking that when that's not where we showed in the film why you can pay twenty programmes to thirty grand. Why didn't you say for tablespoons of peanut butter? Far enough Verona got it so this is what its frustrating I watched the show because, like every five minutes, hearing something that is factually incorrect or that's. Why here, that's why we're not again pressure to both of you. So can we just actual, the breakdown of all these different things The Piero summarize Alternative Centigrams, but that's for maybe a little bit more than like somebody
argument was the quality the protocol against that Bert quantity. For so, if you got a bread on side fought, why don't you do this? You agreed Eve agreed, So lentils of yonder slide eight. So what you haven't agreed on is a communist eight, two tablespoons of peanut butter and to be so bread for enough say for why I'm serious like the comparison, roughly need about removing the proton Canada and showed her case a three three tablespoons. So can you just three and a half tablespoons of peanut butter and two pieces of bread monetary. Now I'm gonna tell you: how shall I I'm in a back up? Why set in the film Ursus go through the slides quickly. That's it! It's a slide. Five. An apple which is TAT all the listeners. You don't get dyslexic, slides I'll, tell him to go to Youtube here. We go so what this is
You still want to know what the numbers from, but I went to the USDA Sigh unfortunately changed in October is not quite the same as when we were making the film it anyway, why slice of bread, five grams of protein and your accepted that right, ok, good did peanut butter, two tablespoons programmes are accepted, that you accept the two tablespoons of Peter but has a grams. Yet we could have more, I have but mob. I would go so your dream of aiding grams of protein for the about it. That's a sandwich shouting film, whole wheat, bread, peanut butter case. So the next slide- and I am being very conservative on this, like an amount. So now look at lentils, one cup, seventeen point nine grams of protein tat,
You asked the idea: would you accept that looked at this, but by scientists I got an iota logic and on the left side, why, after three years, is absolutely get our for? You accept your ass the day when it comes to this, but not in terms of recommendations, we're talking about yeah we're talking about quantity. You're out of my credit of iranian Citizens Rights Zone Boat, but this is something that has been clearly measured. This is not sufficiently recommendations. Now, ok, shops, on the same bode well, and this is a sound so now, got a slide. Nine Versailles Rwanda just at the moment, I just yeah yeah yeah area, so three eggs, eighteen grams of protein? Would you So far we go about as much protein the point about a sandwich with two tablespoons, not the five. It unites less I mean eighteen is
twenty four, not also not one going to the beef, I'm saying so far. I have presented just the two tablespoons, a peanut butter and eighty I was really conservative right, I could have been mopping about. I could about bread had more at the one in the brand legitimately you can get bread. That's six rams reporting so I've been really conservative just have to approve a point, but you if our European, about a sandwich with only two tablespoons peanut butter and will certainly try to arms like measure with a measuring gal? I talked about in the progress programme about five or so any road. I probably would turn three large logically associating grounds and I'll go to organic. Mrs organic ground, beef standard, organic, roundly, ounces,
sounds area, something by five grams. If you wanna, if you want to get into debt into like because its per hundred grams, so I can feel what's the fat percentage, nine point to grant. So it's half not knowledge, not authorize. Nine point: two grams per hundred grams read through the calculation, but that but this is the regular organic Granby users in the neighbourhood of, and then what socks I knew you'd bring up a grasp beef so that I found the lowest and the highest. Ok. So go to grasp that beef slide. Eleven. Three ounces is on the very low end to this are probably the fattest me, but you wouldn't be against animal fat right. Not
Beckley burdens on the person and it doesn't know about primarily right Lois fourteen point four on the highest and actually think my item eighteen gramps. Ok, so Pierre, but a sandwich aging grams lentils. Seventeen point nine can be rounded up: three eggs, eighteen grams, three other beef, eighteen grams. At best, Right when I met the browser big now, if you don't know you don't know, I'm not saying. If you go to ninety percent lean, you can have more protein, no doubt so you can find parting, that's got higher said about. I was trying to show this EL. The myth that you you know crimes have, no protein and animals all this protein. I've just shown you there now. Your second point was that the problem, with
the second point was a problem with the universe homage to get eighteen grams of protein. Nothing. This is a fair point. You'd have to force a foreigner ten dollars right, Tortuga, I was actually the more important point cause. I'm not necessarily you know that may not be a problem for somebody. Who's try none of the others? Yes, the propeller nine abolished quantity, but we finished quantity we finish school shortly, but so are clearly being applied fifteen. So you admit that you can get like reducing our protein you're you're doing what you can get like percentage, so slight, fifteen, the lentils for eighteen grams of protein. Again, if you wanna check this calculation, stop I'm fine. I have had this triple check. Eighteen grams of party in two hundred and thirty one calories guy, because you'd like point and I love the people like Point- the beef and then the pin about a sandwich and frank about those. Even though we were right on the protein now you're trying to pay, the calories, so you didn't put the lentils.
Turn thirty one calories, the next one slight. Sixteen has with us about the same from we must not turn into an calories. Crosspatch beef in the first instance got grasp at being the first slide. Seventeen turn seventy five calories and that was on the lower than the one. It wasn't only seventy percent limit, if I'm just pointing out these different rangers. Four hundred seventeen guys for aging grams of protein right, Sir Fatty meat, which you dont think fat like than with eyes bad right now, such as I once again appeared as a business depending on he's talking about the protein percentage. There was less in my view. There is more protein percentage wise in mind about a savage and there was in there in the green paper on the lost, not lost one. Yet we could have pick something with less covers. Every pick temple, for example, slide. Nineteen hundred seventy calories
so again, would you say, but I do think his argument was that the art did. The argument was the quality: the promotion and there's two of your car either part of it was. You would have to consume more power over just before it can just pray at one point yet so that the first part was you can't like you, There is no near as much protein and then I was like always based on the calories, so the percentage of proteins, you will have to have more powers yet the same amount of protein regional programme. We want how you'd have to submit a mistake. Again, though it was not, Central part of my argument was appalled. I was there was a quality regarding the quality and the quantity was broken under two things. You just can't get as much for like you just showing as much as serving the totally wrong you that have pie tablespoons, a peanut butter totally wrong. Agree agreed at your laughingly five tables right thinking, and then you also said that you have to have so many calories. You couldn't get it and you were wrong again to for the peanut butter sandwich charges in general
one of them comfort from Ireland, Austria. I agree that I don't have. A hundred thousand massive of lentils, thrice economics are coming, got nom slide twenty sweep, pillow and league omelette from christian site where the proteins going. So this is from your site. Eighteen grams in foreign and ten carries the funny thing is. I talked in Russia. He's, my fingers is either first or second came up. I always put the first. You hype, recipes from your site regulated, super salaries will not be unfair. I think the first couple so sweet League Omelette, the parting coming from eggs, aching grounds, informed guys: do you haven't issue with your own meal? No, so do an issue has been about a sandwich on environment and colors, archaic, sudden on that wasn't central to my point. There was a scenario is a surface area. This is not the same quantity. Which is our outward you're. Just a man has no equality Richard S core regret the DS going a minute I will show that you are wrong again. So talent
again hash slide. Twenty one eighteen grams of protein, five, seventy calories. If you want to go to your breakfast of champions, which I thought in her for athletes, slight twenty two and buy them I took your deltoid continuously. I assume that you will not lying so the total from the bottom and but a standardized breaking down supporting his wares. Comparing opening percentage wise six unrelated calories. Do you think that people should not eat that meal depends on Are you talking about, but that's logos, lower parting boy says its low protein right. I don't think that people shouldn't either because it is a part of you. The relevant rely on for years. Is that rely on that, for your proteins are first of all its low protein by like most people standards but you'll stand the protein are much higher, so that would be far off, so that would mean to make up for the rest of the day. Have to have meals at will like normal, protein or maybe you'd, have to buy the protein powder from your website in order to make them up anyway.
So, let's move up to now the by the way, like twenty three largest study, have it comparing completely primates leaders with extensive study. Showing plenty does versus me. Seventy five grams of day that was the average. Aren't you supposed to have one gram per body weight per pound of body weight now you're, not like glass at the upper end for athletes? Ok, that's all point to stress this point to grant this is this is how much there Actually getting the largest study. Avedon comparing poverty does so you can see, is about the same and actually per pound of lean body mass factory. Mass breeders are slightly more there. But our body mass index? There was like Lena but anyway, just once its roughly. Some of us are your next argument. Was the athletes need more protein right or not, I wasn't an argument. Does your admitted that I pointed out in the show? So if you go to slide twenty twenty four, I try point point about the amount that were actually were gone
into the amount. Now we're still were there weren't a mouth athletes kissed his point. There's like made young enough to survive, but not to be an athlete saunter look think that was a point. I think his point was a different requirements on our none for athletes. There's a differ. What no one wants to survive. We want argue on this point. The point is you need more his recommendations, though? What it does is he pushes, Do I really high under decent consensus, showing that then try to make it out that it be harder to get which reward shown you can get enough? Protein fought for, of course, not leads more calories. Therefore they get more protein, percentage. So I just want to rush hour two positions on this, and then we can see if you again, you don't agree with the consensus of science, so this is joint position, paper of the Academy of Nutrition and diabetics, the divergence of Canada and the American College of Sports medicine. So this is for athletes, guy is just wanted me to show you another and second, do you want to leave it out because shortly my cat,
my boys? Her data suggest that dietary protein intake necessary to support metabolic adaptation, repair remodeling end for protein turnover. Generally ranges from one point, two to two point: zero grams four kilograms per day and then the next slide Jamie. If you could. Perhaps I have. I agree with that and have it in my now. Can I join majority same poach, ok, problems. Fermentation beyond a total daily protein intake of one point, two grounds kilograms data, they wrote the Roman. Why are you where are you reading from the big? swear proteins, doesn't want you to know. I said one point: six daughter knows that one pointed to crimes: Europe the things from the last. I didn't really do that's pretty junior. That doesn't make any sense. So this is what is undoubtedly right. Reader them, ok, I've, I've read one points accepted that
your words are all maybe efforts at one or two to tell no one is either. I never eat us protein supple mutation beyond a total daily protein intake of one point, so I saw that the squirrel means about ok about one point: six grams kilograms day during our eighteen reserve resistance exercise, training provided no further benefit on gains in muscle, mass or strengthened insights, really highly an if you look at the out another round per kilogram of kilograms. Two pounds of body weight, you're goin to two point: two. So we're one point six ground. So it's less, it said one were handed a point: seventeen, seventy seven to grams per pound fuel. So you looking at about three quarters of a grand propound recommended anything over that provide no game that I want to clarify it. So you can see the thumb Two very brief point analysis on the top right this chart. Yes, but as you can see it
you can see as the chalk goes up and then it flattens out. There is no further gains in fact, free mass, which has the wax us. After one point six, however, there is a common core competent and devote like how confident other these findings are correct and there is a very wide competence will survive he took it. There were six grounds who decides who is actually up to two point: two and down as low as one I want to point to the Ottawa on the community budget trip nutrition diabetics and the academy sportsmen as one point to deter. So the widest range is one to two point. Two to some. So you think that this, like recommendation, that's a standard thing that you here in a gym one ground one pound of, but there's probably just Niger athlete. At the other end so totalling around two point, two grams on the upper end, the two point- two grams per per kilogram of body weight per day is one, gram propounded by so no doubt what you're talking about certain athletes body builders, front athletes we're at home.
Of all means to apply to everybody. Some people could actually build optimum, and this is optimally, building muscle as fast as possible. Right and some There are one ram somebody might you want to but like readily. It would like one point, six one point: eight, that's scientific consensus that So do you agree with these ranges of this idea, and there is some evidence suggesting that higher amounts may be beneficial. So if you go to Jamie, if you search for examined dot com, how much protein do you mean there's an article there and examined dot com is a GINO about about them said another a panel of scientists Group assigned to a group of scientist right, not not imagine, class, what's medicines off the indicator and write an indicator amino acid oxidation method when we were few scroll down Jamie to the optimal daily,
program, intake for athletes and similarly active adults, or she just click on that you see that paragraph I am studies, analyses found different numbers because four of the forty nine Studies in the matter. Analyses met analysis that had that range lower range were conducted in people with resistance training experience the other forty five we're nobody's. I studies found different numbers. Female athletes required. One point, forty one point: seven, endurance, two point, one or two point: seven amateur! nobody builders to this, namely that our aim point this is the average amount approaches Paul I've told you gotta get some higher one maximize lean mass is about one point: six grams per kilogram say
exactly like does this alone would only need to argue is like totally accepted sports world like whatever it is. It's also says some people need upwards of two point: two grass per kilogram for those interested in comprehensive breakdown and provides another wink Saddam ran out. Rain cannot were not of our often. This is regular. Trees, mail and durrants athletes require two point, one to two point: seven grassroots around, so that the high range yet and so on, could you did say something about two point, three to three point: three than one member one study, pointed out. That was just doesn't actually help you build we're muscle mass, but if you're trying to lean out and also, I think some of the studies that you ve looked that looks like one or two point three ever should got on my computer, I'm in my slides. One or two point one to three point: three. You got about those two things about that one! It's when you in a clog doves
because of blue cornea genesis. You'd pull some of the protein in Ukraine in our use of the Andes, this less protein less for building. So if you're bodybuilder cutting for competition trying to get out like for a five percent and your poaching, I will go up above. That's normal range, because you, your budget, using certain clogged up, essentially using some fuel, and that's also the case with those carnivore people and allow Kido people as well right. They probably adopt I'm just like a normal people. You can actually only during I saw your groaning at ten percent of your energy from the extension of protein to glucose about so the where we're going so that but the two point three to three point: one. By the way it's wanting chloric deficit and its two based on fact free mass qualifications. It's not based on total body weight which all the recommendations run so that the two or three point one in some of these studies, if you
like ok, if someone's fifty percent body fat right would really town, they wouldn't be two point three. The three points I can tell you, but on based on family, want an answer to a pound. When you ve got twenty cent body found, you only way a hundred sixty pounds for this calculation got at any rate where we Would you like to talk about the content of these recommendations and if you look slide one or two Jamie, How I do, and by the way the front in the film excellent. You really don't really well good or bad for a damn out new FC fighter. Aren't you not Donald Forty one Don't worry about it should look at the moment I dare to let us have this morning. A cardiologist died last our monthly over them, how much protein in the body using a single meal for muscle, but building implications for daily protein distribution show up
see one of two point two grounds: four kilograms a day in cohort of young male body builders, although the method of assessment indicator amino acid oxidation technique used in this study has not received universal acceptance for determining optimal protein I am certain that same right, so I am not yet, but I'm one coming, I'm not trying to point out that your hours off I'm send. If you want to tell you, I owe the indicator amino acid station index. If you want to use that than the upper competence is still too pointer, so the scientific consensus eyes wandered blackmail, rightly, but you threw out a bunch of these numbers on high protein making out the visions couldn't hit that level first of all, I ve shown the foods can get that option. The regions and get sufficient protein, and I've shown that have shown the levels that the scientific consensus on the protein ranges for athletes nor inside to consistency. With these three point, three even if they were there's no reason you couldn't get it on upon this law to argue that everyone should be eating three point: three grand nodded
you did. You made out the Lincolns couldn't get enough protein and you were wrong. I didn't say they couldn't get enough. I said that its less likely did they will get no authority by either the likes of those recipes on your website is becoming less so you're being Disingenuous Chris, like God, first recipe was there was sweeping. Train was ass. Well, ass, I was, I had eggs and there was a second one. As a final date. Only omelette tell em bacon hash, and then it was breakfast of championed with milk you'll get legs. So all I'm saying is people that watch the last episode where he was brushing the film people walked away. Thinking you can't get enough protein and then he thought the coup What is not good enough, and now we can get into that. Let's get into that. Let's get into that, because this is the crux of it. Right yes, is like you can download it. Usually acid content of high protein first will be twelve as an argument smash that protein is the next argument. I've just smashed the protein court quantity argument now we'll get into the
we certainly smash the protein quantity, verses, caloric intake right and so it's fat decide as a friend say the based on I have presented you can get about as much power from the things that I said what basis what you presented. You haven't Lawson argument. Yet there is not one thing that you said that that, thank you that's incorrect and I even agree if you're gonna eat meat should gruesome out they want, yourself? So, let's get into a swat lovers. I would really like doing like research and for this I really enjoyed because there were so many flaws, but I was just like I love. I will true seeker right, so I spent for the circular truth and combat now. Bristly would say research on experience absorb what is useful, reject what is useless, add what specifically IRAN about all they did. The George Gilman Iraq be asked about. You can not be. While I care about the care about all these tradition
no styles of martial law. I care about war. Is the truth before I did this. You know painted, I make sense I switched gross, would be for because they make a six me three ratios I thought leading edge chicken, but then I read the research and I wasn't biased by, like anything other than finding out the truth in the optimal diet, for how not like performance and recovery, my injuries- and that is the truth, and that is why I have done and now again are exposed. How you are incorrect about the protein quality, so you said- what's a little disingenuous about the film face at every plant, has every amino acid or yet nobody disagrees with that. But it does have does have enough of each of them. Will first of all people do disagree that I give you want to search, does play in plants of missing amino acids, people think that is missing Some of the nine is entering us. It's, so that's why you put that in the film do- and I saw you left upon my colleagues at every plant- has every amino acid. That's what you said, but you left off the end of my quote, which said
every plant has every amino acid in varying proportions. That is what I said left out the inviting proportions, which again, I think is disingenuous. He did not completely quote you handpicked part of my quote. To represent your view. So people number one. I do think that plants are completely so a lot of people think just like you know that people this article saying when no one thinks that protein gives the managing I've got five studies here. The only five says I could find on the knowledge of collegiate athletes and around fifty percent in each of the studies. Think that approach is what gives you energy some people are saying like. Why did you put that in the film? That's a strong, people dont, think the parting of the jungle about fifty percent of average athlete think that protein turingi, that's. Why addressed in the film enter it back to you like the d? I s right there, digestible, indispensable, amino acid score, the Pd C s which preceded it now either of those right. So
and can you use mention why you like it, and you know what the benefits on? How it's the term, how is it determined so benefits the eye ass, takes into consideration amino acid profile and bio availability? How is how is it just? How did you study, as does did not taken to contain my little cry protein from the total amount of protein absorption, not the individual molasses, because different meter in different mean different individual amino acids absorbed differently, so that was one of the benefits of the deer scoring record. The Essen pity castle would have so. But how is it determined press? You know how its determined the F B, I dont, know the details. I miss our eyes like it just is like it's almost comedy that someone is talking about these systems? That does not know how cut throat slide. Twenty seven I'll tell you one of the benefits of the eye ass, so nothing you might eventually
I think you might know more than you running on. So one of the benefits is the Oro Illegal Digest so the pc I asked ride that took the whole digestive tract to what came out were, and are we looking at look at this, so this is how the ices is brought about. So basically, ass, the ilium. You can't digest your Boyden absorbed the protein really suggested by the bacteria right. So this. One of the benefits of the diaspora is the pity c s right. The old system is that they saw how much parliament through the whole digestive tract, but that wasn't reasonable right, because you could pass the ilium you're, not digesting the protein, the bacteria dressing and you're not getting it to some extent gas. So basically, they put a poor in the pig now this year S was mostly in rats, and this is done in rats and the sum in humans, but it's mostly gunning pigs, because it's a mess, similar digestibility to humans and they basically assessing how much about protein was absorbed right and how much the amino acids was reabsorb.
Now. Somebody will make the argument. Even the f, I will point out the flaws somebody will make the argument well pigs, how different digestibility rate, which is true, and they have a different amino acid profile- requirement different. So somebody what's, I therefore ds buncher crap to make. The argument, even though, is totally stepping animals primarily Norton humans, the guy definitely no acid requirement and different digestibility capability. So to do what you think about scores, the best one to use movement, it doesn't make sense. Right, but I'm not gonna even make the argument. I want to go with you and say: ok, DS is the best thing out there. Ok! Ok! So, even though you can question so you said this is a quote from last time when you are trying to push the film It's all about protein quality, and this, as you said, is an established. Science are firmly established science. He was talking to Europe and you must have said it was established.
Look at this, especially in like third world countries where protein deficiency is common. So we try to figure out how to address this now the affair, The food and agricultural Organisation to United Nations were is the purpose press to prevent nutrient deficiency. Developing countries are so hung a slide of you and appropriate, especially defeating hunger, providing food security not for America or for England, but like the nation in other, but the two hundred and thirty one hundred thirty countries right where people starving malnutrition. That is their purpose, so go looking through the lens of that so it looks like twenty nine, that's gonna bring back these claims on another slides it getting kind of Borneo, apologised to people, just listening, focusing on protein. Malnutrition was largely conducted after the identification of say that, of course, Yokul, she wore cos
Core and the realisation that many children globally are suffering from the sub clinical protein malnutrition to a jet address protein malnutrition, the composition and digestibility of proteins must be determined. Casually are the next slide, and this buyer that was the score here. You see the top candidate the school decrease party mounted and then they go on to say charging food and agriculture. Organisation of the United Nations, has developed methods to evaluate the protein quality of food items and in two thousand and eleven, the digestible indices. Sensible amino acid score D. I a as was recommended successor to the previous, their previous method or got so we're, not disagreement right now, I'm leaving Bordeaux like I'm, not gonna, argue about the animal having different means, requirements, even though that's like that's pretty funny right like why you assessing anyway, so
I have the argument I want I'm gonna have. Is I'm gonna go with everything so far as they are their endorsement of the Pd S, lot of experts endorsing over the eyes of the people, now and slide. So if you want it, it's made for starving children, okay, this is what it's made for, so I would agree if you're in a caloric deficit and you're in a country that has very little protein and you only get in the grounds of parking day. Let's just say that the Arab League table almost half out of it like the way that the method is flawed affair points out legislative legit. I would agree, I would say it get your protein from meat. I would agree because that's what it was designed for, as you can see, Looking at post exercise skeletal muscle, the die, does not attempt to consider how schools translate and optimizing more downstream physiological targets of interest to a physically active personal athlete so it wasn't designed for that system. It was.
Design for starving people in countries where they were not getting enough protein, wondering and of protein, as you would call high quality. Ok, so so would you recognise that they wasn't developed for that system? Yes, based on the scientific literature, but you're inferring it now for the amount that I still think it the relevant measure of protein quality, because it and then you know acid profile and digest illegal digestibility is it is I'm starving, contractor and people are starving. I agree. But, as you can see his eyes, it is not. My opening is still looking at amino acid profile re. Do you can see that it's looking at the at the relative content of amino acids, in particular food? Yes, and is looking at the illegal digestibility, which I think is an impasse?
I repeat, I think its core elements, even though the affairs point out as floors and ten years from now will have a better system right, but right with you probably Phineas, now Polly Overbalances. Imagine our daily bread is the best. I'm gonna go off. Again it looks out and is not just my opinion that is not used for that. This is like in sport. Medicine. Two thousand nineteen, I drink your busy with other stuff. You probably haven't seen this article that came out in favour of reducing this article, but I have not seen a hundred together to come. So so, basically, can you look at the now in the two thousand eighteen journal of International Sports of Washington slide thirty to society of sport? Nutrition, because you like science without muscle proteins and this right, that's an important factor It has been proposed that unless out muscle protein synthesis is
maximizing young adults within intake of twenty and twenty five grams of high quality protein about this about about about twenty twenty five grams of a high quality produce high quality programmes do disagree that, like eating four or five times a day at twenty to twenty five grams of high collar boarding way be right. What are you gonna? Take ties for whatever under use this going system you We will do you agree that that is the amount maximize presupposes when it shows that does for a four hour window. Acute muscle parties is as yet most of the sports organizations suggests TAT for acute protein and take, but have you? No, I don't I'm going with consensus. So if you take that twenty five times four or five times a day, multiply that, What is that that eighty, two hundred but hundreds, twenty grams of parting? That is, that is that enough rubber desolate, proteins and phase out enough
U turn fifty pound awfully, I would say not, so I'm not I'm not But I don't like him anymore parting than that right. So gentle protein synthesis is only one factor. I can you tell me what the other factors are Tissue regeneration and repair recovery right sobbing, on the same page, the TWAIN. Twenty five grams has basically no concern, in a single sitting over for our window and vehicle acute short term, that's been shown to maximum mobile phones in this, and that is because twenty grand and has been shown actually get less. Would like aggregate like seventeen grams or something crazy you're, hitting tooth and you're hitting loosing you're. Getting one point: two point: one went to grams of loosing, which is basing like a formal right telling the others I tell you, should build protein. If you don't have any leucine, if you had only essential amino acids, you want, except for loosing, you wouldn't have the phone and telling all the work. Is that like build the muscle that you that's, what leucine is so
enough losing and you're getting eight ten rounds of essential amino acids. That is what is important in the acute stage of muscle proteins. Is this you getting eighteen rams of and we can get more ground around like its green, a point: zero grams per pound of body weight, but it's this is by six hundred. In fact, they have shown that, like, even if you, four hundred pounds in EU policy I don't need it more than trying to revive ground for some reason. There's something in that number about getting Lucien amount, doesn't matter how big you are so that What can I do to it? So you might need a bit more two point, five or whatever, but consensus is between two and five grams so. This is like a long, but it's like this in particular brand down, so by just going back to their scoring your basic looking like a rules for judges who told me a gauge, it's a torment and you're trying to apply them. I'm a man so just because Jujitsu is involved in anime, it doesn't mean a scoring system for four
I be J J F, whatever that doesn't mean, but that's the best scoring system for Emma Right to ensure that you get points for like yeah you're, what So, essentially in this isn't just my opinion, because this is scientific literature, nor an article that you just put on examined a comma doesnt, how science workers plugin article so slide. Thirty three and its very clear this. It is very obvious: it's not com! It cannot just be about short term. Acute muscle party inferences s right company because you wouldn't be hitting the one point. Sixty two point two, so this states acute anabolic responses are not nursery associated with long term muscular gains the top. It can only be answered by assessing the results of longer juvenile studies that directly changes in lean mass with the provision of varying parting dosages gay. So you agree that is not just about short termism businesses
So what is your? It doesn't matter so point it doesn't matter because yeah, if less either have four times a day. In less than five hundred sixty grams apartment, and you have forty grams right of protein for today. That's a hundred, sixty grams. So if you're going to optimize muscle mass and by the way like how How much money have you put on the last fifteen years? Montmartre meet unlike up our none right, but about the same regret, any religious save your body built on you don't try livestock. Are you trying to tackle as much money as possible? Is, I think, even like? Why get like I'm like one? Ninety one, ninety three, maybe sometimes I, if I go, I feel so I feel so. The hanging of yours and I go to spill so a punching or whatever so is not. Everyone's goal is to optimize Muslim us as quickly as possible by but let's say that you're going. Is Clearly it is not enough to that. You have to hit the one point. Sixty two point, two gramps right right. One, you hit that amount you have to do to that. You have to hit them,
possibly the short term losing threshold and amino acid in the short term right and then you have to hit maybe danger. So what you have to do, two things you have to maximize the muscle pose instances in the short. And you have to get enough protein during the day right of one point. Sixty two point here is that ok, so once you hit the one point, sixty two point, two percent or forty grams, it does matter before you even quoted doesnt matter. The amino acid profile, the food that is now because as long as you hit the essential amino acid amount, andalusian amount in the four to Fanny, you can hit the losing them out and the amino acid amount in virtually all of these vague informs proteins is not not driving like first ball, you could do with like if you do beings rice and vegetables you'd hit
two grounds approach to inflict five hundred semi collars. Now again you could you know that most athletes supplement right. Yes, like darkening got slides. If you want for scientific proof, for you would accept like an early athletes, but even more overset such people are suffering. Protein powder anyway, by supplementing with branches amino acids, because it contains Lucy nicer, led out early tart, yes, one hour for over fifty percent of supplemented with protein powder and a higher percentage, please just athletes period, the ok and athletes, us money, even more- is probably more nice. If you're going to like do something and like take creating or protein, like these african doubles. Let you pointed out the thing that Patrick as we can get into run by the way the misrepresentation of rum from Rollo Hearst others into his arm in ARM Patrick's records. If you want, because there is a law of claims of a major completely false again, so basically you get enough protein. If you hit one of the windows, you ve hit. One point sixty two point: two: with promoting
You can hit the most important synthesis and, like all of a sudden, I always saying there's no benefit in animal protein. Furred amino acid profile versus plant protein, not not, if you're getting it pardon so you're saying if you're getting enough protein for unemployment benefit, we aren't even talking about it, but if actually under your radio may show of, as you have acknowledged of the rate ratio of plant proteins, not only for its not difficult at all, What about Lucy? If you like, if you're, really messing up anything like people started healthy, enough loosing but like if you are planning to promise big and strong as possible and you're, Derek Dictu needed doesn't work out by some business is only assuming that you're taking supplement source on airlines taking sorry you're, not our achieve not now Iran not now you can do it with supper, but I'm not lying there, people taking supplements are you can do Are you assuming that people are taking supplements the Chinese
largest, you can do on a whole food diet pilot with with just food, but it will be twelve right, a supplementary twelve, nothing else you can have the same amino acid profile is me, and I want to touch on the I'm not saying that their own. But that is the argument right and I was but I just want to further off like dependent You live you, you might want to supper vitamin d by some. Some shots wanted, like don't like private body, should do that anyway, in particular the three ok so What I'm saying is as long as you get the amount of protein and again if you're eating, your exercising to optimally bill muscle your exercising a fair bit right. You're, burning, more calories right right, so you eat more calories I don't want my sliders. We're deepens the woods here, and this is getting really nine. I wouldn't be here. The question was, but this is what was with his assertion. Was
the amino acid profile of me, is superior early amino acid profile in context and plans when one is important, when you look at the echo and the goals that they are doing to try and stop world hunger is no important in the western world number one and not important, if you're an athlete and hitting the written but you're getting really one point. Sixty two point grant grams per kilogram, so What you are saying is that, as long as you getting this one point, sixty two point, two grams per kilogram of protein, whether its lentils or peanut butter, or that you I have enough amino acids to achieve the desired results and its essentially, the exact same as if you're, hitting that two point, two grams, if you didn't see later grams, it doesnt matter is out. Do you think that's true if you're getting two point, two grams of protein and you're doing it, You're not doing it in the way that you said where you're not planning it in and not getting making sure you getting enough loosing, which is like everyone after trot,
businesses are, you saying, is low carbon silent, limiting the protein is lower and I agree, but there's a certain quantity, you will achieve this. Told you put it in the programmes or doesn't matter once you ve got the amount right out of point that you had about protein quality is digestibility so that the last point that I want to address: ok, amateur good, so slight, thirty, four, because it you basically claim that. Ok, even if there are enough amino acids, you can't I just as well have more precise data collected the more precise data collected so far in humans, assessing real, specific or illegal nitrogen digestibility has shown that the differences in the in the digestibility between plant and animal protein sources are only of you percent contrary to historical findings in rats or determinations using?
precise methods in humans and just as I understand that you haven't seen this, probably because it just came out last month published by Stanford till I get you something now I'll take this one step further it's only a most like two or three percent different industrial property, and you know its assessed in the pigs. They give them raw food, so they give Rabin's role grand. And you have said one of the reasons that its last I'd digestible is because of trips, inhibitors, what happens when and why haven't you cook, even deafening break them down? Are you getting so when you, when you hear food. The likelihood is in there hasn't been tested. We now the digestibility is less in plants by a few percent. Only a few percent, not a foot, forty percent. This is a hundred percent. Eddie was claiming last time. That's old science, I'm talking about current science right and is only a few indifferent and they imagine
but not only if you hated it, but you would gets equivalent you, my even get more because you're killing the Tribune inhibitors by heating it so the all nonsense about the quantity. You are wrong. The quality the school was not designed for that. It doesn't matter when you get enough protein, so lonely you gonna protein, you using measures for, organization that is looking at hunger. I am we're talking about if people have got enough, I agree if you're in a developing country- and you have very little diver they have proper, maybe not enough in this manner. Will you should be eating the animals? I agree, but that is not what is designed for it doesn't matter They may also provide doesn't matter, and it just doesn't matter when you get enough protein. Let me pause. You first shown here because you ve been going on for a long time now. Listen, there's only one points here is this has not been that good for your arguments. So what are your thoughts?
what he said so far, and what are your thoughts on what he's refuted about what you had asserted about his show? I think he's made some good points and you know my my original argument and what we started out talking bout was so you take the the film in the claims of the found, the specific claims of the film in any I also take the the the question and we started talking about which was: is there evidence that a hundred per cent plant based diet is better than a diet that contain the animal food during those, that's rare that you see what I can for the protein come on and there was a lie. To claim there were a lot of claims and found that we talked about about you, know dairy products causing cancer, dairy products, contributing cardiovascular disease, chicken and fish causing cancer read me, call
the arteries that that we address and haven't had a chance to go into detail on in this show so, but I really want just like regular dialogue about protein rich one about protein and what you just did that you said waiting to something else. So can you answer definitively? Do you think I presented very good arguments against a rebuttal about both protein quality include. The amount and a ratio and about protein quality ankle today, including digestibility amino acids cause. I think the protein quantity is it still an issue? The question of getting the owl? I mean you ve gotta have some ideological arguments Chris, I'm sorry, but you like, I have this proven you're a bottle on protein and on the twelve, I think the qualities and quantity still matter the quality,
the job, the peasant women who has shown Durham. So, even though that scare was developed for the affair, there's still a difference, a quantitative different in the amino acid profile and argue with digestibility, I didn't argue with that. That was not. My point. Do you know I was out of its about amino acids and about protein content and digestibility if he saying, is correct and there really is no need to eat meat, it's what does isn't there. This, isn't that is his argument for protein like come up with some other. You wouldn't got neutral. If you want to look at nutrient profiles and like then we can look at that, but you ve gotta, admit I pray, some good arguments in favour, favor of corn, I haven't seen that last year from two thousand, so I just want to side out my want of summit, as vice like verdict. One last luxuries well got one not well. I got so. I got slides, proving the outcome.
As well. But if you just want to learn it is it's not me. It's not me making up like a like all on the victims, making stuff up like there's a bunch of bullshit, that's put out by billions of our arguments that are totally buried, and also, I think, regions like the worse people for their own movement degree is likely from blood on people are aware and lead for jackets or whatever. It is ridiculous, but that doesn't don't this don't lump me then, and the fishermen with visions and judge on a farm. Better job of explaining things here than you did, even in the film the abbot that its bright tricky Our strategy, because a lot of time, because there were three and a half hours in quite well, I would have made a ten, our film and I was upset. I assure you that if people say all you, a personal Nicaraguans limited, Harvard athletes, you found you didn't putting the film because they stop being vague and completely not true. You are also a bunch of experts ridden putting the film that we couldn't put in and we didn't put them in that wasn't room, it was like I used in filmmaking.
Killing your babies. There was amazing seems that would be really convincing that we couldn't put it like this In the film is far less than one percent of the evidence, the I don't you guys do, it is like of Netflix thing. Sorry like wild, because, while country we d like seven hours, I would like this, where consistent using old, wiser thing to do Kazanovitch like how many people are going to sit down honeybee. Even people who know wants this. While an army America aroused from millions but you're. So when, when we're talking about like we, don't really have that much time left. Unfortunately, because we are here three and a half hours and have another one went after this, but but what about the Phil do you think he hasn't refuted or your criticism greatest was at last light ass police? What does it again? Aside? Thirty four and also bunch of slide showing that actually here we got. There is no research has suggested protein recommendations are different for athletes. Allow following a vegetarian diet, then,
those on an omnivorous die. Now that is the handbook, the textbook that is used when you become a board certified specialist and sports diabetics. So this with this basically saying is what you said earlier. The meadow acid profile wants. You reach us point and a certain amount of grounds for you, ve gotta reach that now anyway, even with meat, that's the thing! Ok, so to Gaza and again what about this they'll do you think that he has refuted your criticisms? I've been reading, I would like our allowing signal, because it productive, that's gonna, be theirs. The blood flow and end of failure function our delegation during lunch. Let's get to that the meat and let's go let's go the directive on Soil Protection Festival signed to require the movie was, it was the other thinkers. Well I mean just talking about information and feel your function will take.
For the reasons are gonna, be innovation, letting us that's cancer and dairy chicken and fish and cancer counterfeit run before all of that, all of your claims can be withdrawn, the reaction in the dolphins things that related to anything your function. Let's, why don't we talk about research about and Ophelia function? The out? Ok, that's relate Sorry, ok, endo feeling of sorts our regarding those with this because we are dinner. But can I almost work? It's already two thirty. It's just a shame, because all the other, maybe he made before rank what other ones were involved in the interview in interest in the film like nothing. When you said- and I have seen you say this on energy- is we have twenty two years research showing that a single high fat me on pears and feel function? That study was call. It was from ninety ninety seven snarls that multiple
studies I can put them up if you want sets twenty two years, but you yes, I've studied from the fact of a single high fat me on it: a failure, function and healthy subjects. So this compared and an hundred calorie diet, both were online and her colleagues, one grew pat was eating. Fifty grams of fat and one group would zero grams of fat. They need. The high fat meal was an egg. In a sausage: drink muffin, I'm not talking about the two hash, browns and non cacophony drink all from Mcdonalds That is what you want, but what it which one are you talking about? I got a bunch. Ok! Well I gotta bunched. It actually contradict that. So that's the same study, the same researcher that did that study found that taking vitamin c any after the high fat me completely eliminated the fact that it had and Ophelia function, which suggested a healthy omnivorous diet with plants wouldn't have the same impact. There is,
Two thousand nineteen review. This is will be crasser, DOT, ceos last game, changers, adding knots of cargoes, olives, berries, spice plans, orange juice, red wine and protein, including milk protein to a high fat meal, prevents and Ophelia dysfunction and oxygenated stress. We ve got several studies that suggested Darien Egg proteins, improve and Ophelia function. Two thousand fifteen controlled trial with fifty two subjects: dietary proteins, including milk and eggs, improved endo feel function. Two thousand six study adding dietary protein to a high fat meal prevented postponed yonder failure. This function we have thousand nine study, followed subjects for twelve weeks, a low carb diet and prevent a failure function, whereas a low fat diet decreased it two thousand seven study with Follows we just go on you just about is rather than as yours
these studies show that animal proteins, don't ya, Maurice now the fields and you have to know more about nutritional and For that reason I responded so first nor you just u combatants. Carbon high Cobb, I'm not I'm not for health and not promoting high Kabul. That wasn't a play. That point. Is it low carb dates that contain animal products and milk and aid protein have been, should always indecisive end of fear? They function not worsen it right. Sorting payment of film was animal. Protein worsens end of feeling right, because that is the scientific consensus and we keep going back. We'll tell us. Why tells auditors These letters to see food consumption protects against sender, filial damage, see food is an animal protein mandatory India, diet, which include animal products, improves post way velocity blood flow markers of after sclerosis. These studies in the peer reviewed literature, but reliable. So what's wrong with us to the industry funny
that is what you do with anyway, who said anything about these being industry fund? What you do is compare everything is healthy compared to what healthy on healthy compared to what. So if you have a low carb diet and you replaced bunch of white sugar and flower, you might not see your internet, the outcome is gonna, be a deep relates to claim that was made in the film. Is that animal products, animal proteins worsen? and a few at a function. I listed a whole bunch of studies as best those suggesting here's one that says influence of food. Patterns on filial, biomarkers, systemic, systematic review. The conclusion was that help food patterns, abundant and fruits and vegetables had a beneficial impact on end of yoyo function. Westernize patterns, hiring, takes of processed meat, sweets, fried food
Refine grains were positively associated. Inflammation makes my point at another. No, it makes my point, which is that quality matter. That's all that matters is no more incisive, muffin and egg muffins and in you show that I'm not showing my studies showing that ok, let's let him explained his studies so so, for example, slide. Seventy one eye, I purposely didn't include those study, because I dont think that there are good thing to competitor slide. Seventy one. This all this is nice causes a graph right, so you can see so I won't say: I've got far in the blood, that's normal, or what do you mean by normal shot? Lots of people Do that that's normal! That doesn't mean is optimal when you see the FAT Nevada and violate it was a film we couldn't throw. Everything in. So when you see fat, that's called Post panda like Peter. That means offer me or fat in the blood right, thats associative, that fifty percent decrease and a failure function, which means nest. Nitric oxide is produced, which means that the arteries can open up as much less auction
Nutrients to the muscles so that such a judge, you can see in this graph added to this, solid line is the the not sideline is how much your arteries dieting flow, mediated, Fraser, dilation right so as they tried less rights. This is after the meal, which was by the way, a shake of whipping cream liquid chocolate non fat, dry milk. As the house, she was the me or you can see that the try just watch your ass, the fat new black sea between two and four hours, a kind of peaks we measured. Those athletes are two hours and again, this is not just a film has been done for over twenty years and scientific literature. So, as you can see, the graph Roger as the dotted line goes out. That's the appearance of more fattened the blood right. You get that like tests, the milking the blood you
see that very clearly that the flow dilation drops dropped by eleven percent. If you look, for example, due to some extent so that when you have those fattened the blood, your ability to your outreach to expand goes down. There's no like what, that's not an egg muffin that is milk and whipping cream, and that's so now go to slide seventy three nights. Grievous Hudson, so they compare another here that we can get the next one as a lump sum. So here we have done. Is there anything to change this? Office I put the green dots for the plant based meal and the red dots. We always meal. So they were eating cream, barbecue milk, oil manners, rice and vegetables. And, on the other hand there having of emails, took him she, vegetables, orange juice, apple, so much for colleagues, a hundred calories, the green is in red and the The greens plants and the is animal based. So.
Don't you want to go into robustly every nuclear sites on before they merit again return. Remember lotta people listening also he's gonna, be the now Amy tat. If you want in the current changes of serum trackless rides were negatively correlated with changes of empty farming for media dilation out, while low carb diets, often more lower serum eggless rides and vacant Brian. I know personally, not our support not postponed early, not after the meal. For that which is important task is not lost a sick three hours? And what do you do? A gunnery another animal based meal? So the next posture this that than how is it that tremulous rides go down overtime, if such a body, because your body adapts to it so dark red and cinema, the study suggested cute hd genes hyper tried to ruminants. That's the find the blood which causes
endo filial dysfunction via enhanced oxidants stress and that- and this may pave the way for the developed. Of course, our thorough satellite services and as an awful I throw sclerosis under Quadrant. So what that saying, like in the shortest she's, been short term and contacts with long term is under tooting effectual undefeated function your ability to exercise and perform in the long term effects conclusions like heart disease, and if you go to slay seventy five member that charter, we looked at with the green dots in the red dots. Eight point: two percent decrease in FM deed, two hours following the animal based meal. Two point: seven percent increase in FM two hours following the plant based meal, so you got less blood far so Chris makes out. There's no science, no evidence. It was just crazy thing that they made up. It was the coach cardiovascular committee for the NFL. There's been real watching this. For years, I didn't say that James I said there is a lot of other evidence contradicting it. So,
the Europe we want to bring up study you acts of dietary carbohydrate restriction, verses, loafer, Diane Onflow mediated dilation. This is what you you ve been talking about, having at allows. We asked the peak flow mediated dilation at three hours, increased from five point, one percent to six four point: five percent, the carbohydrate restricted group and decreased from seven point: nine percent to five point: two percent in the low fat dying right: twelve, weak, low carbon, great diet and proves post perennial vascular function more than a low fat diet right, because the low fat diet has a bunch of like what flowers, stuff, that's the thing, but, as is often the low carb diets, due to two that I now hear that guides with animal. If we're talking about protein to claim in the film was that animal protein causes failure dysfunction. Somehow we ve got enough talking about fat and I've
on August mention many studies that show that the dietary proteins, including milk and improve and Ophelia function, fish they don't like only right here, nobody Joseph These are you going to say a study right, because Chris could bring an area dietary proteins, improve and Ophelia function under fasting conditions, but not in the post perennial state, with no effects on markers of locally information technology intrusion, two thousand fifteen study, ok, but dietary proteins, isn't even necessarily mean animal based. Pronouns right now says including milk and eggs, including job does the long liners that he can prevent any study. I'd have to dig into the funding what, because it's always what's compared to so you can show a huge benefits, eggs. If you compare the lot you can. This also does not need these worth proteins included. Soy sauce, milk and eggs and they all improved and Ophelia function. And then another,
so why China, dietary protein, milk or sway to a high fat menial prevented brand yonder field this function, and then there the two low carb studies that I mentioned, there is controlled trial that found in low carb high fat diet, improve pulse way velocity, which is another marker, vendor theoretical function. There are studies of the Mediterranean Diet, which is a healthy diet. Pattern it includes some animal products include improved pulse way. Velocity see food consumption protects again, send Ophelia damage, yes had compared to beef, it does really know, there's a guy just they like. For example, you said you were trying to refute the study about increased risk of cancer, colon cancer between Reggie Times non vegetarians right, the three times increased risk without around about white meat, fish or chicken once or twice a week, and then you go to
met analysis, which is not comparing your comparing fish to bacon beef, of course, can pairing any did these your control trials that look at dietary proteins no propaganda and aid, because, first of all, you have meant that you don't even know how to read the science. Is that far? Do you honestly feel qualify to read even a single paper? Yes, but you don't know how we too far reaching I too, I took a masters level research methodology class. So those are user. I am referring to the studies that are obviously literature is like, and you haven't answered the quest like if, if, if protein impairs interview, a function, wire studies showing that milk and egg don't good job move, George, they started study prepare showing that, like the hall right went out when you did like a knockout without touching someone, just as you can show, studies that I can't like I haven't, had a chance to read and begin
two doesn't need made. My point is that ain't right, So you know I'll put like the film has been reviewed and has been accredited by the defence health agency. We have heard the right, so you think they like the site, you, basically your Europe, your debunk, which you failed miserably to debunk the film right. I have proven again and again your points were in valid. I have scented data with healthier meals. You trot thought I was gonna go to the feeling, somewhat Mcdonald, I didn't. I showed one with just basically dairy, just very increasing it and I have shed three or four studies I daresay proteins than I am talking about and I'm interfere with and Ophelia Fungal and actually improve at the bottom bomb liners job right, but at each step of the way. Chris is not in line with scientific consensus, not, protein recommendations, not one definition of carbohydrates nor in the field of action, nor on him I'm just not checked, but you shouldn't
having him on to say, he's he set himself is not exploited nutrition. He is unable to read us that I am unable to read a single study and understand it. I am not calling data that miss characterisation. Now, ok, then, tell me tell me who the competence and of all of us in the forest plots listen I am presenting I've. I've never is not as anyone I'm so anything a violent ass put myself out that I'm the the expert that is but then, when evaluating these died out. What able doing these studies that the same way that you did you collect did information on the island to the sunset which on learning reactors with thousands of years, thousands of hers not was cigarette. There's there are many experts. With disagree, but at the same thing I'd like range or what I know it's not the same at all, yet it's
surely not of the same that there's the the consensus of experts that agree that we should be on a hundred percent or even ninety five percent plant based diet is the same as the consensus on climate change and not even close. To parallel is that the scientific consensus censorship predominantly plant based diet and vague, an inveterate, even vaguer, diet, probe helpful for all stated lifecycle. I've shown that you can get enough protein. I've shown the quality DS going, doesn't matter, I've showing that the be twelve stuff you got is completely wrong. What else do you want me to show you you're me to show you that, like even despite having lower creating level because people have pointed out in the film all you said is only you can always amino acids. That's a knock! You didn't point out that the study said they didn't vague vegetation, have lower creating sores. Therefore it may affect performance, they didn't test it. I've got a bunch of studies where it has been tested where they had vegetarians and mediators had equivocal factory mass, the critical power output, a queer quivered time,
fatigue, despite lower quality levels, and we know the creating psychogenic I've also, the study shows that when vegetarians actually take supplemental creating they get Greece gains a viable one pound of muscle over the mediators, so, despite creating, which we know the most studied supplement. Are getting less because their intake of creating as lower yes, I don't and so, when the alert supplementing they see a bigger response, you could look like that. The other way. You could say that we should have more creating in their diet, and they, then they wouldn't need to supplement with that to get the bigger response right, but I'm sent it points out that, despite lower creating told him, We know the agenda which are performance enhancing. They still have equivocal fat, free, mass muscle and power output and time to fatigue, and when you add creating in, you gotta benefit. Now I'm not saying that everyone should be created, but if you try to build as much money as possible, I think you should and by the way meters
also tend to supplement that China body built with creating as well. So I'm saying that, despite the fact of lower created and which we know is brought, would you argue that, like the probably the most well studied and best Supplement that we know of the can help must my setting yeah, but I fear enough so despite our greeting people, Pompey sites can still But much muscle, mass and when they had created but get even more than the meat does not got by bunch, assigns the perfect her so basically job. If someone watch the lost episode where he tried to deepen the found for two hours and fifty minutes Do you feel that I fairly addressed a lot of the credits and I've can address a lot more? He talks about nutrient quality. He likes to refer to a diet, quantities. Is that we learn we're lowering certain nutrients got visions, allow typically in between moving to the calcium using because they see a bunch of shit but maybe does about nine. So he likes to point to a new
its goal, which favour does not comparing equivalent legions vigour. Vegetarians in general are, do you know they smoke less? They have hired drink last year of a higher diet, quality and junk is- and I know that you're all wearing apples to arise because, as you are all of the things that are better for health, including eating your plant based diet, because Hey things that just the only one thing that they don't do better is more more plants voice, saying that you lump in mediators with people who need to stand and american die. When you say, mediators, you're not talked while people were eating. Organic told me about the way that sixty percent of their calories from alter processed and refine them. I know that's why they're nutrient, but that's what they are saying to us, that the media is not comparing like Joe Rogue ends and his diet, verses and equivalent all I'm saying all I'm pointed out is that you are saying the regions are typically more efficient in certain nutrients. They are uncertain nutrients, but that's because a lot of people
smaller legs, so you're, looking at the overall group of them versus the people that are doing it. As recommended by the studies that are showing the appropriate amount, amino acids, they're doing any justly or their rebalancing it out and via a variety you not laughing at him, think about, I don't count economic protein, I'm taking legislative I've right and if I really good source, actually nutrition facts, the oak and he's got this useful thing called. He doesn't like that. Cause is not an alignment with around nutrition facts at or it's just as it has a very strong plant based agenda because I loved, follow the science, so indirect, forget all of the useful videos or now, if you like three minute videos for people to learn about the site, gives all the references but the useful thing there really is what Does he have like the daily dozen about what we're all the evidence of Sharm, should beating what you're reading We are not all.
Haven't showing like how much lagoons, how much fruit and vegetables in the flax in others such a thing, so it just like is like a fridge magnitude and throwing a fridge and, James. You made an excellent point. Cresty have anything to say in closing. No thank you. Probably their eradication time cider velvet combative. Now you knocked at the park did a fantastic job. Essentially you mean amaze me consider what they let me explain why isn't coming in here I felt like you'd put your film out. I felt Chris felt the same way having you in here, why he did debunked. It would just be a waste of time to put your position now. He was gonna Chaz too drunk, but I've also felt that would be unfair. Not have you come in and explain and refute his debunking? I think you did a fantastic job, represent Emerald polyantha left come back on thought about God of unless autism had ever met with through that next time? Ok, thank you Chris. Thank you to answer by buddy. Well, thousands
It's right. That was a long ass, Podcast Jamie HOMES, up outcast. Three hours and forty two minutes and varying impressive performance. A James works very impressed. So the podcast is brought to you by the mother fucking cash app. Yes, it was, and cash app investing when you download the cash out from the app store or the Google store, use a promo code, Joe Rogan all one word you receive ten hours and the cash apples and ten dollars just and rents, fight for the forgotten charity, building wells for the pig meat in the Congo, and if you didn't hear Zack bitter, is gonna run across the mother fucking country for fight for the forgotten, like what is gonna run across the countries can be forty days of Enron. He's got run across the country. Hear me Jamie. What kind of crazy
Is that a guy's, a savage were also brought. You buy Cd M d, you can't get twenty percent off your next order. When you use a promo code Rogan, check out salaries for any of seaweed. The m these premiums, dvd oil products so c, B D, m d dot com is a promo code Rogan for twenty percent off your purchase of high quality, c b d oil products from C b D, Andy in and then there's your slogan, don't worry about it! Jamie don't worry about it and we're awesome, Archie by brave the web browser re. Imagine keeping your personal information private as you surf the web. The web switching to brave is very easy. Going import your bookmarks with just one click and in less than sixty seconds, you will be enjoying a better internet. It's free and all your chrome extensions will work and brave listeners. The podcast switch
brave today at brave dot com slash again and switch now she tried brave dot. Com slash. Rogan brave yesterday was about big tech. Today's about us Jamie. We did it. I think you're one for tuna into the show, appreciate you much love.
Transcript generated on 2019-12-24.