Fabulous! I made an episode about this study and still learned a ton from this. To me, this is exhibit A for why the best source of info is from scientists who actually run scientific studies, not just arm-chair quarterback them. Your product team keeps upping their game. The opener was Diary of a CEO-level quality, even with music!
@@markgarcia5845, Poor innocent animals. You don’t want to be in their shoes 👈🤥 . Longest living people on Earth, are vegan. PIaque forms eating animals. Plant-based/vegans don’t have pIaque. ✅♥️😬🐒🐵🦧🦍👱🏼♂️👩🏽😉. Buddhist monks most of them are vegan ✅♥️💪😬😉.. fruits and herbs and spices, is the key to healthiness ✅😉.
@@TheProofWithSimonHill You think you can convince him to discuss the issues he has with The Game Changers documentary? I really respect Chris he’s awesome!
There can’t be anyone in the world who doesn’t love Christopher Gardner. He’s so smart and funny at the same time. It’s always a pleasure listening to you both.
Chris is so damn likeable. He really deserved the opportunity to clarify some of the misrepresentations and harsh criticisms from guys like Attia. Thats why we love you mate. A platform and voice for those who deserve it.
So tired of the back and forth debate....plant based vegan for almost 9 years. ..My husband & I.. 66 & no health issues, no meds. Feeling amazing every day. Best decision ever. For health, ethically for the animals and the planet Have an awesome day 🌱💚🐮🌎
I would never go pure carnivore, nor vegetarian or vegan. We are omnivores by evolution. Anything extreme may be applicable short term to fix specific problems, but in the long run is just ideology and unbelievably dumb.
@wendywitchner6790 like I said, goos for you. I know plenty of people who ruined their health on plant based. And now I know plenty who are thriving on carnivore. Different bodies need different diets
There are thousands of carnivore folks out there saying the exact same thing. You don't have to believe it but all you have to do is put your bias aside and look. If you don't do that, you can't coherently comment on the subject.
I' m 67 and I've been a vegan/vegetarian for most of 35 years. My health is Excellent and my blood tests/urine tests are Excellent. I recently had a cardiovascular test that showed No problems. I eat 5 or 6 servings of fruits and veggies every day. I've been eating raw fruits and veggies my entire life with No adverse effects.
Truly enjoyed this episode on an information and especially human level. How can one not love Christopher Gardner? I find every conversation with him to be uplifting. Appreciated the honesty and the wit in both of you guys. So thanks Simon, keep up this kind of work.
Hi Simon I just wanted to thank you for this interview and also for your previous interview with Christopher Gardner. Listening to both of you is such a joy. It's difficult to find anyone teaching / researching dietetics and designing RCTs in our Universities today that is more likeable, principled or smarter than Chris (even if he won't say so!). It was interesting to contrast the research he set up versus the additions to the Netflix documentary that were outside of his control (as interesting or entertaining as they were). Also the methodology for the RCTs that would need to be adhered with to ensure publication in 'premier' scientific journals. The quality of the interview technically is excellent as always (always better with the in-person interviews when available) - I feel I could watch this in a cinema and it would stand up to repeat watching in terms of sound quality / editing / videography / lighting etc. You are always the best host possible and the professionalism / friendliness that you give to all of your guests always makes the podcasts a welcome breath of fresh air. My wife and I went plant-based in 2020 and your podcasts / channel interviews have always been a welcoming space to visit, even on some of the more research-based technical aspects of health that I sometimes struggle to keep up with! I enjoyed the Netflix documentary, regardless of any criticism that some people have levelled at it. I knew in advance that Louie Psihoyos was director and that Christopher Gardner was involved in the trail it was based on (via your previous interview and one with Rich Roll). To see George Monbiot, Tony Seba, Marion Nestle and Mayor Eric Adams appear early on in the first episode just increased the enjoyment of what was a beautifully produced series. Some aspects were obviously included to make it entertaining, but the same was true of 'Game Changers'. It still didn't detract from the science. Also, the criticism that the documentary is pro-vegan misses the point. There are ethical concerns linked to our diet / the environment and animal welfare that only add to the importance of shifting away from a diet which is so dependent on livestock. Dentists don't get criticised for trying to move their patients away from sugary drinks - the health of their patience should always match what the best research shows. Your book 'The Proof is in the plants' is excellent BTW. I'm glad that Chris cleared up the criticism that had been levelled by Nina Teicholz. I knew that he'd stated in one of yours - or Rich Rolls interview - about students becoming more engaged in the University course once elements of the environment, social justice and equality were included, but it was great to hear him clarify the point (I'd added similar comments on Chris MacAskill's excellent 'Plant Chompers' video on the Netflix documentary response). Thanks again for such a great interview and for all your channel does to disseminate important guidance to everyone who takes their health seriously, but to always make the videos so life-affirming to watch. Best wishes Michael
I love Simon's attitude towards science, the way he calmly picks the information apart, learns from it and the ideas he's putting out there as to what kind of data could be interesting to look at etc. 😁 love every episode!
While the study is intriguing, lets not forget the countless benefits of a plant-based diet for both our health and the planet. Come see the plant-powered side of things!
Love Dr Gardner. What a great human being! So down to earth. It is because of him (and Dr Skerrett) that I've adopted a mostly WFPB diet to help with my insulin resistance and heart health.
Thank you for this interview. Really admire Christopher Gardner. He's passionate, engaging and appears to be super ethical. Loved hearing about the backstory and nuances of this study. Can't wait for further results to be revealed. My decision to be vegan was, and still is, for the animals. You can't unsee the horrors of animal agriculture. However, once you become vegan, you discover all the other benefits - personal health benefits, mitigating climate change, protecting the health of our oceans, reducing wildlife extinction, land use, water use, antibiotics resistance and mitigating future zoonotic pandemics. Also, the welfare of slaughterhouse workers. That's a long list of benefits, and is much more complex than just a dietary choice. These help cement my choice to be vegan.
Good podcast and interesting to hear from Chris about the process of the study. I always admire him because he is not closed minded. But in my own experience a 100% vegan diet didn’t work. I have insulin resistance, which was shocking at first when I received the news because I was very active and ate relatively healthy. For 4.5 years I adopted a vegetarian diet and 2.5 years of those were vegan. I did all kind of acrobatics and mental gymnastics to plan my meals. I had a laundry list of supplements supporting micronutrients such vitamins D3, B12, K2, Iron, Zinc, Magnesium, and Omega 3. Kept a good amount of protein and combined foods to accomplish the required baseline I needed because I do intense training, not exercising, since I am an instructor and competitor in martial arts. However, my A1C never improved, I developed muscle pains, connective tissue problems, numbness in some toes, and fatigue. Modified the diet, added fasting, etc. without success. Then I started eating meat and eggs and my body reacted positively. I am mostly plant based but I eat seafood , eggs, and occasionally meat. My last lab test results were all good. Is it genetics? I don’t know, but I don’t think there’s one diet for all.
A few years ago when I started hearing about the vegan diet, I was also blessed to hear from one person who was vegan, including the rest of her household, who gave it up. Why did she quit? There were some issues such as her children saying they were always hungry. But the big point was that 'it was too darned complicated' That alone was enough to dissuade me from doing it.
WOW! You guys thoroughly took down the critiques of the study. It's a solid study. No study is perfect. This one showed us what a healthy plant-based diet can do in real life. It's awesome! Thanks for consistently providing rigorous, life-transforming nutrition content, Simon!!!! ~ Marian
Also, one of the elements of a plant based diet is that it will be lower in saturated fat. If everything is equalized, then you're comparing the same diet to itself.
A great discussion with an admirable (and likable) scientist. If only I had resisted reading the comment section. Usual malicious keyboard warriors & zealous diet fanatics of all stripes. Ridiculous.
When I read those comments, I channel Alice's (from Dilbert) "Fists of Death". Ridiculous. Disappointing. But indicative of how many choose to communicate.
He is 100% terrified to talk diet because he knows all the science says it does matter, a lot, but he doesn't want to give up his venison jerky! (which he is an investor in, so yet another conflict of interest)
@@stevef6523 Same impression here, it's a pattern I think. He's so ready to recommend exercise for EVERYONE because he LOVES exercise. He's eager to recommend various kinds of therapy (DBT, Conti, Beth Lewis's Feldenkrais-style work) because it helped him & he's gotta spread the message.
Sad that so many "social influencers" (the usual suspects ) just had to immediately fire off insulting and simplistic remarks and arguments ( instead of just taking 2 minutes to pick up the phone and call Professor Gardner or e-mail him and ask a few easy questions. ) Great video and well done research by Professor Gardner. I'm sure the Netflix documentary was a little "sensational" and used some stuff that wasn't necessarily very good science ( for cinematic reasons ). At least the documentary got millions and millions of views and many more people have now been exposed to the idea of veganism and plant-based nutrition.
Wow! This was great . Chris takes all criticism well . I can imagine how this must feel to have to defend yourself from doing your job , kudos ! Thanks Simon !
Peter Attia is an investor in a processed meat company Maui Nui which sells processed venison Jerky. Processed red meat is considered a proven carcinogen by medical bodies and WHO, but Attia consumes it everyday since he clearly does not believe the consensus. He also gets really agitated at any study which concludes against animal protein or is pro plant protein (which is basically most modern studies lol).
Peter Attia claims to eat up to 10 jerky meat sticks per day which is over 4000 mg of sodium just from that snack food so I hope he has good health insurance after he wrecks his health.
I really loved this episode ☺️ Chris is a very professional scientist and i am glad to hear this perspective on this. Especially because people sometimes take documentaries as 100% true, not remembering that they need to sell at the end of the day. I wished Netflix shared this interview so it reaches more people. Thank you Chris for being venerable and accepting the interview! And also thank you Simon for this episode and providing the platform for this type of conversations.❤
@@TheProofWithSimonHill Exactly. Not that that should disallow him from critiquing this study, he’s after all well-versed on the science, but it’s interesting that he’s criticizing the design and how it was conducted, and I think that his inexperience should be noted for context. He’s wrong on the merits of his argument, which is the most important part, but also, he has no experience on this so it makes sense that he’s wrong. He needs a little more humility.
@@davenielsen413 I don't give a fig about whether he has or not. I care about the quality of online discourse. And I loathe rhetorical fallacies masquerading as trenchant observation. Do you believe only those who have published papers may read, analyze or comment on papers in the field. If so, everybody in these comment sections should pack it in. Play the ball, not the player.
IMPORTANT CALCULATION MISTAKE IN INTERPRETATION OF THE TWIN’S TRIAL 1) I think The Proof with Simon Hill is an excellent podcast 2) The twin’s trial was a really solid and well-done scientific experiment and Chris Gardner is an excellent researcher - the way Netflix reported the results is a much different story 3) I’m a pescatarian BUT IN THE PODCAST, UNFORTUNATELY SIMON AND CHRIS MAKE A RATHER LARGE MISTAKE IN THE CLINICAL INTERPRETATION OF THE PRIMARY RESULTS OF THE TWIN TRIAL Both agree the primary result of the trial was a reduction in LDL cholesterol so it is important to put these findings into a proper clinical context. 1) Simon states the difference in LDL was 14mg/dL - that’s correct 2) Simon then states that converting this lab value form 18mg/dL equates to 1mmol/L - that is NOT correct - 1mmol/L = 39mg/dL - a 14mg/dL decrease = 0.36 mmol/L NOT 1mmol/L- so Simon unfortunately made a BIG conversion error 3) He then states a 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL = a 50-55% relative reduction in CVD risk and he then compounds his error by stating a 14mg/dL reduction would = a 40% lifetime reduction in CVD disease - based on his initial faulty conversion. Unfortunately, Chris then agrees that that that is a “clinically significant difference absolutely“ 4) I believe the CVD estimates Simon states comes from a 2023 article by Kevin Maki academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/44/28/2623/7177680 which states “Each mmol/L reduction in LDL-C induced through pharmaceutical and other interventions is associated with a 22% reduction in risk of a major ASCVD event over ∼5 years. Over decades, each mmol/L reduction in LDL-C induced by genetic variants that lower LDL-C is associated with a larger risk reduction of 50-55%” 5) SO WHAT ARE THE CORRECTLY ESTIMATED RELATIVE BENEFITS FROM A 14mg/dL REDUCTION IN LDL USING THE MAKI NUMBERS? The Maki paper presented 2 results - RCT data suggests an ~22% CVD relative risk reduction and a hypothetical life-long extrapolation suggests a 50% CVD risk reduction a) if you use the 50% decrease - and then use the 14mg/dL change (0.36 mmol/L) result - the estimated CVD relative benefit is closer to 18% (50%*0.36) - NOT 40% b) if you use the 22% estimate (22%*0.36) you get an ~8% estimated CVD relative benefit Whether or not these numbers are “clinically” significant is up to personal interpretation - but it is far less than the 40% that both Simon and Chris stated 6) BUT YOU CAN’T JUST LOOK AT LDL CHANGES In practice, most CVD risk estimate tools (decisionaid.ca/cvd/) use both total cholesterol and HDL to make 10-year CVD risk estimates. So, to be fair I believe one should also include the effect the diet had on HDL. Well, HDL was reduced by 4mg/dL in the vegan group (I know these results weren’t statistically different but that doesn’t matter if we are estimating the risk in the actual people in the trial because the differences are the differences). I estimated the change in total cholesterol (which is mainly LDL) from the % LDL changes seen in the trial. Using these commonly used CVD calculators, what would we see if we estimated CVD risk estimates for the two different arms the twin trial? I put the average twin’s numbers into a CVD risk calculator and there was virtually no difference in estimated CVD risk over 10 years - the absolute 10-year risks were within 0.1% between the omnivore and vegan groups. So, the change in hypothetical CVD risk from these lipid changes is definitely NOT 40% and could be - depending on what approach you use to estimate CVD risk - could be close to zero. That in my mind is an important clarification given the LDL results are the primary finding. A CAVEAT It is important to realise that no matter how you estimate theoretical CVD benefits all of these estimates are based on a number of assumptions that are debatable. However, it is really important that results of important trials are contextualized correctly.
Hi Simon - any further thoughts on the interpretation of the LDL results of this trial? It is the key outcome of this trial and I think to needs to be interpreted correctly - as I mentioned I think there was an error in how you conceptualized the clinical importance (CVD risk) of the LDL change and wondering what you came up with when you ran the calculations again. In fact when it comes to any sort of nutrition impact on LDL it is key that the magnitude of the change be put into the proper CVD risk context. Thanks.
Yes, there is so much more to CVD than just LDL, and 14 mg really isn't a big deal in the scheme of things. I would like to see a calcium score on all these people, but it would have to be in 10 years or so.
Peter Attia is one step removed from the carnivore diet, you’ll see, I’m calling it. He’s a joke at this point when it comes to diet. All he knows about is exercise stuff.
Wouldn’t go that far at all. He shares many of the views as Layne Norton and other nutrition researchers.
5 месяцев назад
Well, he also believes that you should train as much as possible as opposed to exercise for health. It's basically what he said in one of his recent videos about undertraining
I don't think carnivore is quite right, he's not anti vegetable at all. However he's been completely focused on protein intake first and foremost from a dietary perspective recently in a way that seems to completely be missing the forest for the trees. He's been on board with dietary trends before (keto and intermittent fasting) but at least both of those were broader trends, this protein thing seems to be his own personal thing (for health anyway, I suppose power lifters and body builders also focus on protein for performance).
@@evanrosenlieb8819 it’s because he sees maximizing strength and physical performance as being critical for longevity, so it makes sense that anything in support of this including emphasizing protein intake would be advocated by him. Also he does it because as we age, protein requirements actually go up, but in the world, protein consumption goes down as people age. So maybe he puts extra emphasis on it for this reason.
Here is what Zoe Harcombe PhD’s review on study design (looks like it’s destined to be a success as it was designed that way on purpose) * The participants may have been identical twins, but they weren't identical in characteristics. These differences were not adjusted for. Some baseline food intakes were also quite different between the two groups - notably grains and plant-based protein. * The diet was provided by the researchers for the first four weeks and then participants provided their own food for the second four weeks. * The main outcome of interest was the change in LDL-cholesterol. Cholesterol did fall in the vegan group relative to the omnivore group, but it would, because the consumption of plant sterols increased in the vegan group. * In the food delivery phase, the vegan group were given an average of 345 calories fewer than baseline and nearly 200 fewer than the omnivore group. This calorie gap was largely maintained during the self-delivery phase. * The vegan group lost a reported 1.9kg over the 8 weeks (the raw data showed the loss to be 1.4kg). Fasting insulin was reported to be 2.9 μIU/mL lower in the vegan group than the omnivore group. Both could easily be explained by the calorie (and protein) inequalities introduced in the trial. * The paper claimed that vitamin B12 intake did not suffer. It was noticeably higher in those assigned to the vegan group at baseline and vitamin B12 intake did not drop to zero during the trial, indicating that fortified foods were being consumed.
It’s always a pleasure to see an interview of prof Gardner 🤩 I like his work and how passionate and enthusiastic he always is 😊. I didn’t like the Netflix show like I hoped I would. I expected to see the study and to have a follow along. But the study was one piece in between all of the other possible arguments to go vegan. One after the other in order to be sure that maybe one will click with the audience 🙃 And some stuff is indeed like it is presented (eg the industrial farming etc) but sometimes you see that they use tricks to nudge you into thinking with a certain logic or playing with the emotions. Thus I felt it was kind of manipulative (ok it’s a big word but I don’t think of a synonym right now). What I mean by that is that my expectations were “I will see a study with explanations of the facts and the nuances with the pro and contra ” and it was biased in only one direction. I prefer to follow podcasts like this I think. Of course if you are vegan you will love it because it confirms your beliefs. And of course if you are a carnivore, you’ll hate it because it’s opposed to your beliefs (the latter is an assumption because I don’t know the carnivore diet principles that much).
I really admire him and his study. I loved the documentary. I will say that given the people that were interviewed and what they had to say it clearly was biased towards a plant based/vegan agenda. I'm talking about the documentary and not the study. The study speaks for itself. Being plant based and a nerd myself it really didn't touch on things that I already didn't know but a definite one-sided slant there.
Loved the conversation! Dr Gardner has an infectious personality! Really hard not to admire him. I would actually love a study which compares animal and plant based saturated fatty acids since their chain lengths are so different. I do know that several athletes use MCTs as a supplement on long races. But the data on coconut oil is so limited. I would also love to see if there are differences in virgin and refined versions of the oils and a true, in depth assessment of virgin coconut oil on total health. I also wonder if consumption of whole grains or fibre reduces the absorption of saturated fat in the gut. Thanks for bringing such amazing guests in. Please remain as objective as you are. Became a fan after your episode on Dairy. You are currently my favourite podcast and a breath of fresh air in the click baity social media health space.
Peter also is so closed off because he thinks he knows all . Textbook narsasist. Has to be the SMARTEST one in the room . ALWAYS ! Very sad ❤ . Eyes mind heart and soul wide open . NO FEAR ❤ Don't die , we are coming . See you in 2500.
Having listened to him for a while and read his book, it’s clear that he’s not well-versed in nutrition. He’s very much of the opinion that plant protein is inferior, and we should be getting our protein from animals. His talk with Dr. Layman and his agreement with him that schools should not be adding more plants and removing meats from school lunches stating that it is dangerous for our children just made me shake my head in disbelief. I know he tried being vegan at one point in his life and turned on it pretty hard because he said it didn’t work for him.
Yeah, it doesn’t take a professional psychologist to see his obviously flaws in this area of critical thinking… full on narcissist might be a little far although we all have traits, he definitely has very obviously blinkers on, profound arrogance and a huge ego to match
Hey Simon I have been following you for years and really respect what you do. I am someone who has been plant based for 6 years and knows a LOT about nutrition yet has no formal education on the topic. If I were to make a career out of educating people on healthy dietary patterns much like you do, what sort of path would you recommend I go down? Thanks in advanced!
@@TheProofWithSimonHill It's a natural phenomenon that happens (backed by science/researched of course lol). You can't stop it unless you consciously work on it. I noticed it on some of your "r" words. Obviously I'm an Aussie so I picked it up, but you still sound quite Aussie.
I really enjoyed this episode, thank you. I like the idea of looking at real world eating patterns…I have found low carb impossible after a point in time, and I’ve seen the deleterious impact of yoyo dieting in my family members. Adherability seems key to outcomes, that’s clear from Gardner’s work. Peter admits he is agitated by nutrition and moved away from his previous fasting pattern. I think there’s a disordered eating pattern dressed up as athleticism underlying his opinions on nutrition and most people would have a difficult time adhering to the shortened window he follows. I like that he is using himself as a subject and have learned quite a bit from his disciplined rigidity.
Interesting video-thank you. Title just needs to be Herbivore vs. Omnivore (classification vs classification) or Veganism vs Cranism based diet (ideology vs ideology).
As a fan of dr gardener’s research I wish he evaluate the effects of vegan diet on other organs like brain and nervous system or musculoskeletal system in future
I really find the criticisms of this study incomprehensible. The conclusions regarding the benefits of the diet seem intuitive and of “real world” value.
I haven't read through them all, but hopefully others have pointed out the error in the guest's comment that a person can't achieve an LDL under 50 solely through diet. I certainly have, by following Caldwell Esselstyn's oil-free vegan program. 48.
I listened to Peter’s book; I was disgusted because he peddled a book titled “Outlive” yet he has no knowledge of food nutrition?? Those with long lives did not exercise the way he does, they do not have the gadgets, resources, he is trying to recommend in his book. I stopped following him after that book.
1:37:30. Mark Hyman discredits Gardner’s research because of the way he eats? Does he follow this same logic with Phinney and Volek’s research? What about the LMHR study? We don’t even have to mention Nick and Dave who made this study happen. The lead researcher is Matt Budoff who is low carb, and has stated he thinks carbs are inflammatory. Does he discredit that research now?
Disappointing to hear that unnecessary conflict has occurred to muddy the water. Scientists are not obliged to agree with others, in fact it's required to drive quality, but there seems to be other factors at play.
I like Mark and agree w/ a lot if his content as well. However I do find it odd how he critique Bryan Johnson and the vegan diet in general for supplementing with ‘processed’ pea protein. While he himself supplement everyday in his AM smoothie w/ A2 goats whey 🤔 🤷♀️
The scientific rigor of Peter Attia's content, including his guests, is light years beyond this rhetoric. My only hope is that so many of you buy into this narrative that it results in a decrease in the cost of meat so I can afford copious amounts to feed my growing family!
Did you listen to the episode? I felt Dr Gardner put Peter’s criticisms to bed pretty easily. He’s also open to speaking to Peter directly. Maybe he should come on the show?
Christopher Gardner is a Seven Day Adventist, which is the real reason he pushes the vegan/vegetarian diet. His “study” is religious based. Nothing wrong with that but he should have disclosed that bit of information.
NO! You cant eat even one drop of dairy or any other animal product and call yourself vegan. If you eat ONE egg per year, you are an animal abuser and should send in your vegan card immediately! You will also probably die early from that saturated fat in the yogurt. Go 100% vegan or go home!
Of course Attia didn't reach out. He's invested in being an influencer which means he can benefit from misinformation and reactions rather than the harder work of getting down to the truth.
Nice video thanks ! But words have significations , Omnivore is the ability to eat plant and animal product, so everyone (humans) is omnivore. Vegans are also omnivores (talking about the title)
one day will come where we can synthesize food from basic elements until then eating plants is better way to preserve human species....eat least possinle food to save resources.
if a plant-based diet requires b12 supplementation then it isn't deficient in b12. So basic that I question people's integrity who make the deficiency claim.
I give the Netflix show 2/5. I came away doubting everything said due the vegan evangelism. Spent no time talking about problems with going vegan. There was some science in the program but it was hard to follow.
So a lifestyle vs a diet? Does anyone know what the word “vegan” means? Is it healthy to not wear a leather jacket or buy shampoo tested on animals? Discuss
@@TheProofWithSimonHill Yes I can. Gardner is a terrific story teller. So we get a lot of fluff around the actual science. I think more than once you mentioned trying to not get too side tracked. Don't get me wrong, it's nice to listen to. But it also leaves me wondering what the actual study really figured out. Also, I'm an engineer and an introvert so excessive fluff tends to be overwhelming for me.
The problem with a plant based or plant exclusive diet is the volume of food you need to consume to get enough calories. If I didn't eat meat and fat I would waste away. I would like to eat more plants etc but the more gas producing food I eat the worse I feel. To much roughage effects my sleep as I feel it moving thru at night. I have to eat a Low fodmap diet . I've tried many times very very slowly and same results.
In metabolically healthy people on carnivore and keto diets - low carb if you will - the LDL level naturally grows high. It has been also proven that it is not a risk of cardiovascular diseases. Dr. M. Budoff.
Yet another episode ruined by talk of junk science using animals. Sad that Dr. Gardner would have thought using an image of a duck being tortured for foie gras to somehow be "funny."
if you're anti vaccination maybe a podcast about scientific research and evidence based medicine and nutrition "isn't for you" (shows with high probability that you're wrong)
@@madolein. when's your next moderna booster? fauci ouchie? hey, like, if I'm tested negative for C and you've got your 4 doses protecting you, and ppe, and social distancing, and half of you lot are spreading it (thus proving you're not scared of being around spreaders) and i'm only a tiny 10% cohort (so you have like, 10x less chance of even encountering me in the wild) then whence cometh your abolishment of medical consent??? response??? ah, no. didn't think so ;) this is your "medical consensus". this is your "medical professionals". this is your "establishment". trustworthiness: zero.
An omnivorous diet offers a diverse array of nutrients essential for optimal health, such as complete proteins, vitamin B12, iron, and omega-3 fatty acids, which are crucial for brain function, energy production, and overall cellular health. Human physiology is well-adapted to digest both plant and animal products, allowing for a balanced and comprehensive nutrient intake. Research supports that a balanced omnivorous diet can reduce the risk of cardiovascular diseases and certain cancers, improving overall mortality rates. Additionally, this diet is culturally inclusive, practical, and avoids the need for supplementation required by some exclusively plant-based diets.
Yeah B12 is in meat because the cattle’s feed is supplemented. As for fatty acids, fish eat algae to uptake O3; plant eaters get the algae. Same source. Only a plant based diet is going to help get those global emissions down
