4 ms·

And what do we mean by meat? I'm sure toxin filled fish effects you differently from fresh. Or grass-fed (natural diet) chicken is different nutritionally than

And what do we mean by meat? I'm sure toxin filled fish effects you differently from fresh. Or grass-fed (natural diet) chicken is different nutritionally than industrial chicken. zngtk4 is basically saying that nutrition science is sampling at too low at resolution to make definitive claims, I buy that. How many times can you flip-flop on eggs until we stop listening? Obviously they're something else going on. The argument that they're generally "bad" is too low rez. Not to mention how we were told to eat margarine over butter for 50+ years, and it turned out to be one of the worse things to consume.

jodrellblank 17y ago
And what do we mean by vegetarian? There's got to be a massive difference between living on bread, potato, cake and nut-roast and living on salad, fruit and steamed greens. "Not eating meat" really doesn't say much about what you do eat. Raw foodists claim there's a lot of denaturing and damage done to proteins, enzymes and more when food is cooked. There are differences in composition between food that is cooked until done and food that is cooked until blackened (e.g. on a barbecue). Some claim there is measurable damage done when food is blended compared to chopped or juiced 'gently'. There is lots of skepticism about microwave cooking versus traditional ovens. As well as eggs, popular advice zig-zags on soy and types of fats. So... >> zngtk4 is basically saying that nutrition science is sampling at too low at resolution to make definitive claims, I buy that. I buy it too.