Response to The Game Changers Debate: James Wilks vs Chris Kresser on the Joe Rogan Experience 

Would love to see Layne in a debate with Wilks on JRE. Would be incredible.

I want to see Layne debate Wilks on Joe Rogan, but I don't think it will happen.

Dear God, you listened to joe rogan talkfor over 3 hours?! I'm sorry you had to go through that. God bless

It's really astonishing that every 2 out of 3 comments are about debating this or that guy. Did no one figure out already that a debate is not a fruitful exercise if you actually want to find out the truth? A debate almost always becomes a competition. I don't really care about winners in debates, I just want to know the truth, or whatever is available to this point. I much rather hear it on a template that does not include interruptions, haste, physical intimidation or anything of the sort. If anyone has a grievance, just make you oppising video. If you actually want a debate, I'm already suspicious. Stop with the damn debates, people!!!

Obviously someone like you would of been a much better debater for James great video appreciate the 30 hours you put in

Didnt expect anything else than a perfect breakdown of these claims, great job Layne

Seems like Joe was not convinced after all, he is going carnivore

well the focus was not and should not have been " are animal products bad for you " buy rather "is only plants bad for you" i.e. is it necessary to eat meat in order to reach a full filled life (w.r.t. activity and health) Because eating animals is then to be deemed unethical

Joe should've got you to debate

Why are you all trying to make it seem as if there was a debate question? There was never a "Is meet bad for you" question. The guy came on to defend himself against a guy who criticized his movie, and did it well. Period.

Debate Dr. Avi ASAP !!!

Seitan has double the leucine and would be a more logical steak comparison than a pb sandwich. Also, tofu, and a mix of legumes. Etc. Vital wheat gluten, legumes, leafy greens. There's lots

The JRE debate was terrible because James was so aggressive and Chris was so meek. So it was too easy for James to push his bias and agenda and run Chris over with it, even though James’ logic was super flawed and contradictory in many ways.

@biolayne tried to make it through your whole video but you clearly have a bias and you didn’t do thorough research. You REAALY need to look up how dairy is strongly correlated to prostate and breast cancer. There actually is a very specific process as to how that happens and you found industry funded studies to support your point about how it doesn’t. There is a PLETHORA of evidence that is so strong in fact that one would even say that milk in general causes prostate/breast cancer.

Gotta love your peanut butter sandwiches for max gainz, boys.

Rogan messed up picking Chris to debate this, you could see the confrontational tone was really.throwing him off.

Come to the Ask Yourself discord and debate Avi. He helped prep Wilkes for the debate

Wilks wrecked him…Kresser is finished on this topic

Thanks for this Layne, the effort is much appreciated.

Look man - as someone who doesn’t eat meat I only care about the negatives. If the diets are equivalent, then how do you justify the amount of pain and suffering we do to cows, chicken, pork and lamb? It’s dogmatic how people view eating meat.

Finally someone smart talking about what we all wanted to hear in that debate. Rogan blew it as the moderator of that debate.

I really wish this debate would have gone better because I love nutrition debates. Chris was not as aggressive as he should have been towards James (to the point I feel he just gave up) and James was so aggressive, too aggressive I'd say, he came off as a total asshole in the debate. I've only seen such poor debate etiquette a hand full of times and it never looks good for person acting that way. James not only was incredibly disrespectful to a man who never acted that way back at him (at least in person) but he also NEVER addressed any of Chris' criticisms of his film and data. in my opinion he just tried to look as smart as he could by regurgitating information that his (probably) paid researchers told him to say that had nothing to do with the criticisms Chris had and in most cases he didn't even fully understand which this video makes incredibly clear (I also read the your article before this video) and I find it incredibly hilarious due to the amount of times he claims to "really dig through the data" while constantly claiming Chris is incapable of doing so himself. I walked away from this debate beyond annoyed and with a very poor view of James Wilks because of his "talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, let me finish, talk, talk talk, personal insult" tactic. I don't think he's as smart as he wants people to believe though to give him credit he's not stupid either (he clearly knew what he was talking about in AT LEAST one topic) . I just think he was an asshole to someone who had genuine criticisms of his film and he simply was butthurt because of it. I'm glad I found your responses to this and I hope everyone sees it because this was a straight up BAD debate (by no fault of Joe) and people do need some clarification on this topic. Ps: I only commented because of the 420 dislikes :)

Thank God! 🙌 Reading through the Joe Rogan Podcast videos, it did seem like a majority agreed with James and ridiculed Chris, but intuitively, James' debate seemed to have several holes, weak points, tactical distractions, and as mentioned, several fallacies! Thank you for this video. It's great to hear things from an ACTUAL expert!

Joe didn't run the debate. James kept interrupting and every time Chris tried to talk, James wanted to finish his point and then he would slide into another direction. I can't believe Chris didn't walk out. He was not treated welll by James nor Joe Rogan.

Debate Dr.Avi please and thank you

People, just watch The Game Changers and also watch What The Health. Make your mind up for yourself. 👍

Layne, Paul Saladino, Wilkes and his science advisor Roundtable let’s go

Obviously you eat meat lol. I'm over all these studies lol because they all change over the years and I find if people like meat they sway towards that data.And if they don't like it then obviously sway towards a plant based diet. The fact is that people use to hunt meat which means burning a lot of calories in the process and they didn't have guns.The animal was obviously organic/free range grass fed and the hunter wasn't eating meat every day.So most of their diet would have been from plants.Ive even watch a doco on a tribe that hunt sometimes for days before they get a kill meanwhile for energy they are eating berries and honey for energy.The fact is you can thrive on a plant based diet and plenty of people around the world do so but show me someone thriving on a meat only diet lol and don't say Shawn Baker lol his blood test are terrible and that was only 12 months of just meat.

debate Dr. Avi

I don’t think Layne will debate science. I don’t know if you guys know Layne’s history but he made money selling the metabolic damage nonsense. He got called out for it and luckily he quit this nonsense. He’s telling lies for money, he doesn’t care about science.

“That’s a lot of peanut butter sandwiches” 😂

Why are you saying James attacked? instead of that he defended claims made against his movie. You show that you try to be unbiased but then your bias shows through when you start with something like that.

What's stopping you from going to JRE?

Why do you focus so much on the peanut butter sandwhich and not the tempeh, tofu or lentils? Seems kinda odd. He literally describes that the PB sandwhich is higher in Cals because of the bread. Of course a base of just protein (Meat/eggs) are going to be more efficient calorie wise than a carb and a base. Tempeh, tofu and lentils are all better comparison points to eggs/beef.

You should really debate Dr. Avi. He's on par with you and your knowledge, unlike Wilks or Kresser. spelling edit

Not all studies are equal. 83% of studies could exonerate animal protein but those studies could be much smaller and lower quality than studies showing increased risk from animal protein.

Join Dr. Avi for a debate! The people have spoken!

Instead of acting like your are being objective, just try being honest and state your true intentions.

10:56 did you take into account estrogen receptors on breast and prostate cancer cells? If you eat dairy which has mammalian estrogens and you have cancerous cells in the breast or prostate coupled with the increase circulation of estrogen because of a leaky gut, will cause those types of cancerous cells to grow faster. It's like throwing fuel to the fire.

So what if we dont need to eat animals? What if we only do all of this just for taste: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dvtVkNofcq8.html Are we able to justify it? If it is not necessary

I was waiting for this. You should’ve been the one to do the debate. You’ve totally changed my mind about nutrition the last few years.

By deconsructing Wliks' slight inconsistencies you are just highlighting what all human beings do. Not really a valid criticism, just a smoke screen.

I would love to see Layne debate James Wilkes reasearch lead 😊 I feel we would actually get some where with this whole debate! Joe Rogan make it happen 💪

Wilks was definitely prepped by some Hollywood lawyers (courtesy Cameron), and the strategy was, to win an argument you don’t have to prove you’re right as long as you can prove the other person is wrong. When he started with cancer 87/13/25 whatever I knew he was just there to make Kresser look bad, which is why he asked at the beginning about Kressers qualifications. Fucking annoyed I spent all that time listening to the debate, and Wilks just refusing to talk about the imperial data and research methods.

Layne are you still gonna debate Garth Davis with Dr Nadolsky moderating?

Glad I didn’t buy what James was pushing. He came off as an arrogant, condescending prick. While watching the “debate” I noticed many of the points you refer to in his line of “reasoning” and realized he’s doing exactly what he’s accusing Chris of doing. Sad thing is that the majority of Joe’s viewers, based on the comment section, were fooled by James.

Hey James...."WOULD YOU AGREE LAYNE JUST MOPPED THE FLOOR WITH YOU.....WOULD YOU AGREE?"

If you have to lie to make your point, your point is a lie.

im always interested in different opinions on stuff like this, because nutrition is such a clusterfuck(even when it comes to science). thank you for investing your time

Who cares. Just be happy and eat whatever you want

Man I was waiting for this like no ones business

Brand new study "A high-protein (~ 1.6 g kg-1 day-1), exclusively plant-based diet (plant-based whole foods + soy protein isolate supplementation) is not different than a protein-matched mixed diet (mixed whole foods + whey protein supplementation) in supporting muscle strength and mass accrual, suggesting that protein source does not affect resistance training-induced adaptations in untrained young men consuming adequate amounts of protein"

Watching that debate was hard, there was no push back on anything. It's nice to hear someone say the things going through my head for 3 hours

Something tells me that your 30 hours does not compare to 3000 hours of research. James also has an army of researchers behind him. Besides, how can you disprove any industry funded research creates a bias - regardless of how little they are involved? My view is that’s it’s best not to use them!

Holy, so much respect for you that you put in the time and actually watched the whole movie and discussion. I had to turn off the podcast like 30mins in cause I couldn't stand the twisting, aggressiveness, silly arguments and attempts to discredit Chris as a person. It is crazy how people can fall for that.

The whole reason for pointing out the forest plot is because there was an error in the write up and if Chris new how to read them he would have noticed this error. The conclusion of that study showed a positive correlation. Did you even listen to what James was saying because it doesn't sound like it

Thank you for the part about leucine and protein synthesis I learned more on this podcast than any others by the analysis and explanations you gave

I did the math for 3g leucine for lentils vs 90% lean ground beef. Lentils: 17.65 oz 507 calories 39.7g protein 90% lean ground beef: 5.17oz 258 cal 28.4g protein

Have to say, I tip my hat to you sir, for the incredible amount of prep involved and the engaging delivery, and the points made.

Did you see the film? He does not use a plant-based meal versus a cheeseburger he used a burrito all plant-based but they just left out the meat. The other burrito had almost the same exact ingredients the only difference is that they included chicken.

I love that you do theese videos for us that don't know all the research, when you,as an normal human without a background in nutritional science, hear a podcast like the Joe rogan one you're left more confused than anything else. In the end I was left confused and I think most people are like that when it seems that even eksperts( self proclaimed or with credentials) can't agree on basic nutrition . I absolutely love your videos, you make sense of all the bullshit

Debate rules should be X studies will be cited and named prior to the debate so both sides have a chance to review the underlying data.

Debate Dr. Avi. Don't be a coward.

About the carnivorous habits: All sentient beings suffer, regardless of races or species, thus we have to make sure to respect them. In my opinion, we have no right to take the body away from an animal as we have no right to do that to another human being - because they can suffer. The most important question is not what's good for "me," but what's good for "us" as sentient beings. There is no argument that can override the Golden Rule, or the ethic of reciprocity, which is “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

In a nutshell, it's the blind leading the blind out there.... same shit different day! LOL

Post your bloodwork, Layne. If you don't have high cholesterol, I might listen to you.

Thats good! Thanks! It was quite painful to watch Chris going under.

11:11 so localized inflammation wouldn’t cause a local increased risk of cancer? Or is it that the area that becomes inflamed is not the area that has higher levels of cancer? It probably doesn’t matter where people experience inflammation in the general population, but specifically where inflammation occurs in people who get that cancer. I mean that as a question.

Appreciate all the work you and Holly do to make the studies and the science accessible/understandable/relevant for the masses who might otherwise be swayed by propoganda and or the loudest voice. Thank you for your time.

Layne the type of guy to give a F, just enough to set the record straight but not enough to care if your feelings get hurt

I’ve been following this debate with great interest having studied nutrition for well over “1,000” hours. I’ve listened to both sides of the debate and, frankly, I keep coming to the same conclusion: eat mostly plants with some animal products (nose to tail). I’d like to see the heavy weights so at it, such as Dr. Davies and Dr. Greger vs. Carnivore MD and perhaps yourself. Chris did not do a good job at all. He made a single interesting point about plants reducing the inflammatory effects of meat. It just got lost and was not discussed. Anyway, put everyone on a panel, list any necessary disclosures and then attack each topic one by one: b12, protein availability, dairy, etc. This is the only way to put this crap to bed.

39 vegans are mad

Wilks: accuse your opponents of your own wrong doings. Oldest trick in the book.

It's useless to stand there and talk with no one debating you. It ALWAYS sounds good...when no one is countering you.

Great job biolayne! Good Lord, that was a lot of work!

Kresser is an acupuncturist lol

This is Golden thank you Layne

Dude, Chris got destroyed and Rogan even said damn I have to rethink how I’m eating now.. you are as they said in the 90s “bugging”

We really appreciate it layne. And it's damn valuable too

james' strategy was to know what he was talking about, basically

Really appreciate how long this must have taken you! Thanks so much for the info - hope you do have a chance to debae it on JR's show

~30:30 What about the leucine in two slices of bread? To be fair, Wilks and Kresser were specifying two slices of whole wheat bread per sandwich, with about five grams of protein per slice. The cronometer app would have the leucine content. I just haven't checked it yet, but it must be substantial. And it needs to be taken into account. Does anyone have the leucine content in a slice of whole wheat bread?

Don’t waste your time debating Wilkes. It will be fruitless. It’s not enough to be right, you gotta yell over the guy.

Interesting Lane is only Cherrie picking what he thinks Chris the fried was right about and ignore all the things that Chris was wrong about

i stopped listening to the podcast after 15 minutes' thing (the 84% showed no or decrease rate of cancer). I don't think I can treat seriously a person who makes this type of mistake.

TRUMP USA 🇺🇸 TRUMP USA 🇺🇸 TRUMP USA 🇺🇸 TRUMP 2024 2024 TRUMP

"Keep that same logic when you see me James" - Layne "no love" Norton

Fair enough. But James really trashed Chris. That's undeniable. Joe should pick his "experts" more carefully

thanks Layne. Perhaps you should go on Joe Rogan and debate James along with whatever crazy expert he brings

6.26, it's not silly it's framing the data in a way that fits Chris's narrative, it's actually one of the most interesting part of the debate, in terms of understanding how people use data in a way that is truthful but leading. Also game changers points specific cancers not all cancers, all cancers is a very, very wide spectrum and different cancers are actually very different to each other.

That debate was 2019 in a nutshell. Call fake news on anything you disagree with, call other people out on logical fallacies & then use the same ones yourself. James is great at arguing. His doco is pretty convincing. Too bad they had to mislead people, rather than just stating the positive things about whole foods.

This is way better than the actual debate

Would love to see the a debate against yourself and Dr. Avi. It would be a great discussion.

Well after all this I don't know weather to have a peanut butter sandwich or not..

Great video!!! Great breakdown of all the facts. Side note: Chris Kresser has some really great podcast episodes. He's actually quite good at taking super deep dives into biochemistry and mechanisms and relating info from one thing to another.

Only through collision of adverse viewpoints will the truth remain standing. Keep the throttle on in that demolition derby car Layne!

Most good cheese has little to no lactose left, so blaming all dairy products, even in the case that line of inflammation logic was true, isn't very honest.

Obviously, it’s still possible to lose weight on any diet - just eat fewer calories than you burn, right? The problem with this simplistic advice is that it ignores the elephant in the room: hunger. Most people don’t like to “just eat less,” as it may result in having to go hungry forever. Sooner or later, many will likely give up and eat without restriction, hence the prevalence of “yo-yo dieting.” While it should be possible to lose weight on any diet, some appear to make it easier and some to make it much harder. The main advantage of the low-carb diet is that it may cause you to want to eat less. Even without counting calories, overweight people tend to eat fewer calories on low carbs. Thus, calories count, but you don’t need to count them.

Man, your accusing someone of using logical fallacies when you use them in this entire video.

Thanks Layne, and well done on changing the username, hopefully that helps with driving traffic your way.