Anonymous said...Well, that's an interesting way to raise an objection. Start with a meaningless question, follow that up with a "what about" a bunch of stuff, then say something with no reference and no substantiation. Quite the technique.
What does the toilet smell like after you have a dump man! What about all the cholesterol/saturated fat/uric acid/animal metabolic waste products/heterocyclic amines/benzopyrenes etc?
Look what is happening to Robb Wolf. His health is falling apart judging by his latest blood pathology. :(
But, being an analytical person, I'll take the time to respond. Point by point.
What does the toilet smell like after I have a dump?
It's smells like a toilet. What else can a toilet smell like? Perhaps you meant the contents of the toilet, in which case the odor is that of human fecal matter. I don't notice any difference between that odor now versus when I was vegan, vegetarian, or low-fat high carb. I do notice a difference when I eat asparagus, but I'm straying off topic. Is there an embedded claim in your question that would indicate a proper diet results in crap with no odor?
What about all the cholesterol/saturated fat/uric acid/animal metabolic waste products/heterocyclic amines/benzopyrenes etc?
What about them?
Cholesterol - fine. I enjoy my precursor hormones to testosterone and enjoy the testosterone even more.
Saturated fat - Great! Just like the fat stores my body uses to buffer transfer of energy between food and output, my body loves to run on saturated fat.
If you're curious about the impact from these two evils, consider my blood pressure was 100/53 and my pulse was 46 this morning. These are probably more meaningful measurements than the smell of my poop.
Uric acid - fine. That's why I pee. It's also why it's called urine. My kidneys are healthy, and I don't eat large amounts of sucrose or fructose, which are known to elevate serum levels of uric acid beyond healthy levels.
Animal metabolic waste products - Well, that's why I poop. :) My body will have some waste products from anything it uses for fuel and building blocks. To show concern in this area is the equivalent of showing concern that a gas-burning car has exhaust. And I don't mean some silly environmental concern, I mean the fundamental concept that to use anything for fuel will result in byproducts of the chemical reactions necessary to extract that energy.
Heterocyclic amines - Which ones? That term covers compounds that range from vitamins to carcinogens. I assume from the negative tone of your inquiry that you mean the carcinogenic compounds most people refer to that may be produced by cooking meat at high temps. Simple, I don't cook at high temps. I don't grill meat. Most of the meat I eat is cooked at temps very close to boiling. I slow cook the meat along with the veggies, and it only requires a temp above about 170f to get the job done. So, no concerns. Oh, that reminds me, the data that shows these are carcinogenic is based on human models. There has not been any population study or otherwise to demonstrate it actually is a risk.
Benzopyrenes - Uhhh. Well, I don't smear coal tar on myself, live near an active volcano, smoke cigarettes. Oh, you must mean the little tiny bits from charring/grilling meat. I don't do that either, mainly because I don't like the taste. I occasionally sear it in clarified butter, but never on a flame. So, no concerns there.
Okay, I addressed the totally open-ended "what about" questions. That was tedious. On to the last one:
Look what is happening to Robb Wolf. His health is falling apart judging by his latest blood pathology. :(
Have you ever been around Robb Wolf? I have. So having actually seen him in person I can say he's a pretty healthy-looking dude. I'm envious of his performance numbers in many areas. But you can't really tell too much from just looking at someone, so can you share the information about his latest blood pathology?
See, there was no substantiation, no explanation, just a stab at Robb Wolf.
So, I don't know what your objective was with that comment, but throwing out a bunch of open ended "what about" style questions combined with random and unsubstantiated stabs at well known people doesn't achieve much.
I loved your answers to this stupid comment. I am bookmarking this page. Please continue with the witty posts!
ReplyDelete"Oh, that reminds me, the data that shows these are carcinogenic is based on human models. There has not been any population study or otherwise to demonstrate it actually is a risk."
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean by human models? Did you mean to write that the data are based on animal models? Or, is there some sort of human modeling, distinct from human observational study?
Christina: Thanks!
ReplyDeleteAlex: Sorry, not very clear. By human model, I mean the type of testing where individual cells are isolated and exposed to a substance to see the effect. This as opposed to testing on actual human beings.
It is a world of difference to let a person ingest a particular substance and then track them against controls to see the impact. My cells in a petri dish are not me, nor do they benefit from the supporting metabolic process of my body. The sum is greater than the parts.