View Single Post
  #859   ^
Old Thu, Mar-23-06, 23:47
theBear theBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 311
 
Plan: zero-carb
Stats: 140/140/140 Male 5'6"
BF:
Progress:
Default

Would someone please explain to me why I am feeling forced to have to say this? Shouldn't it be obvious?

What Stef really said, was the the Inuit had older looking FACES for their ages- but had the bodies of youths much younger. The Inuit's face is always exposed to the weather and get massive amounts of sunlight directly and reflectively from ice and snow. Good for vit D- but hard on the appearance.

There is literally no such thing as 'acid-alkaline unbalance' in the body- it is nonsense. Your body is so well buffered that the small change in pH due to dissolved CO2 (carbonic acid) is sufficient to induce rapid and intense changed in the breathing rate.

A diet consisting entirely of straight muscle tissues with fat is complete, that word means it contains literally every nutrient and is sufficient or in excess of the necessary levels for perfect health. I defy you to find ANY example of someone with this longevity and contrary results. If you do not or cannot understand the preceding, then there is little hope for you - on this thread.

Why butt in on a thread with over 800 posts and with reading any of it, try to put forward such egregious nonsense which does none of us, including you any good? Ego? Find some other group to grandstand with, please.

I suggest that before making any more comments on what Stefansson said or wrote, and inaccurate statements about the Inuit, you should actually READ Stefansson's various books and articles. Inuit NEVER eat 'Fermented stomach contents, and their environment is basically tropical and very warm due to their 'perfect' clothes and lodgings. I do not understand why anyone would go to so much trouble to write such long diatribes filled with misinformation, misquotes, myths and downright lies.

Experience in this dietaryu path:

Also I HAVE EATEN A PURE DIET OF MUSCLE MEAT FOR 47, THAT IS: -FORTY SEVEN- YEARS. I eat nothing vegetal, no greens no fruit no nothing, I am comfortable, very fit and I have a body nearly identical to what I started with at age 23, only stronger and more muscular. I am 71. I have all my teeth.

You cannot simply make stupid, irrelevant contentions on health with ZERO experience on which to draw. You cannot get me to accept any 'research' found on the net or elsewhere as valid where it contradicts experience, and mate, I have LOTS of real life experience. In case you are not aware, the majority of 'research' done and published in recent times is suspect and much of it has been shown to be bogus, containing falsified data, massive editing and restrictive and false fundamental assumptions which form the basis of the studies. Why? MONEY and FAME. You can easily devise a 'study' which would 'prove' that pigs can fly.

If anyone truly believes that we are omnivores, which has no basis in our evolution or body structures, then why are you here?

Note, please- the title of this thread. If a person has any common courtesy, they would first READ the thread, in which all this nonsense has been thoroughly examined, before spouting off.

Bone loss with age is primarily hormonally driven, also related to reduced fresh meat (bio-calcium) in the diet- plus lack of sunlight (or Vit D).
Reply With Quote