/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>16852849
Something about propaganda psychology being tuned to commercial marketing. It's pretty wild that you can get people to defile their very natures.

>>16852849
I think it was just an accelerating mass of idiocy of health scares and media sensationalism that coincided with the single mother epidemic in the late 90s that made everyone retarded about fat

it's why modern younger men are generally a lot more effeminate and modern younger women are all retarded/a bit more masculine
it's messed with everyone's hormones

>>16852849
>you're fat
>eggs have fat
>therefore egg make u fat
probably also companies wanting to sell cheap processed junk food made from plants, like sugary breakfast cereals. sales of that would probably go up if you convince people to eat less of other foods normally eaten at breakfast, like eggs.

>>16852849
The more processed the food, the more ingredients, the more companies there are making money off it. If you buy some eggs from the farmers it cuts out all the middle men.

>>16853347
>Local farm sells beef, pork, veal, lamb, poultry, vegetables and eggs
>All meat could be classified as organic, grassfed and free of antibiotics if sold in a supermarket, yet is only 20% more expensive
>Vegetables and eggs are the same price as the supermarket
Are you saying I'm sticking it to the jews, while buying local and eating healthier than I ever could from a supermarket?

>>16852849
too much of anything is bad for you. eggs are no exsecption. you should really only be eating 2-3 eggs per week. too much cholesterol and fat will give you heart attack

>>16853355
Not even the ACA backs this up anymore.

>>16853355
Dietary cholesterol is not linked to the risk of heart disease.
Eat food that rank low on the high-glycemic-index, and don't be overweight. In essence: Avoid simple carbs.

>>16853355
>2-3 eggs per week
kek, no. Its more like 2 a day is really the upper limit.

>>16852849
Every time they say eggs are bad for you, they turn around and say "actually it's good for you".
The answer is they don't really know.

>>16852849
Saturated fat consumption is correlated with high LDL and heart disease.

With actual scientific research that ketopigs like you ignore.

>>16852849
They told my Dad in the 80's that the cholesterol in eggs is bad and to limit himself to 1-2 per week, and also not to eat butter. Of course he followed the advice because how would he know and why shouldn't he listen to the experts. Anyway, he's still alive and eats as much butter and eggs as he likes now.

>>16853712
scientific research previously lead to recommendations of smoking cigarettes and eating lots of refined sugar.

>>16853369
>In essence: Avoid simple carbs.
Avoiding any kind of processed food in general is pretty good advice too. As long as you do that you can start to tell what your body needs pretty easily and it's hard to mess things up too badly.

>>16852849
Eggs, meat, and dairy have low profit margins. Most profit from animal products goes to the farmer.

All the opportunity for massive profit by brand-name middlemen comes with processed plant-based food.

>>16852849
I found that most egg posts here are sponsored by the American Egg Board (AEB) as some sort of guerilla marketing campaign. Please go suck on your precious eggs and stop shitting up my board with this shit.

>>16853898
Funny post. Vegans actually are that dumb.

>>16853900
Checked. Not vegan. American breakfast as we know it stems from a 1920s marketing campaign by Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud's nephew. It started because there was an insane surplus of pork and eggs in the US at the time and the pork and poultry associations turned to Bernays to help solve the problem.
Bernays used many of his uncle's psychology concepts on essentially how to trick people into buying something. Basically showing a slogan like "9 out of 10 doctors recommend starting your day with a hearty breakfast" on top of a picture of bacon and eggs to build the association that eggs and bacon were a nutritious, healthy breakfast.
I'm not here to say whether or not eggs and bacon are good or bad for breakfast, just that our stereotypical breakfast stems from a fucking advertising campaign to get rid of surplus foods.

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4612464

This shit all continues today too. People should always be questioning the products they buy and consume. ie, why do we do the things we do?

>>16853930
Cool story, bro.

Coca-Cola. Pepsi. Twinkies. Cornflakes. Twizzlers. Eggs. Which one doesn't belong?

>>16853950
Twinkies. Twinkies have never been marketed as healthy (twizzlers came from licorice, which is legitimately a medicine if you use real anise), and just exist as shit that taste good.

>>16853891
Meat industry is heavily subsidized, you lying ketolard.

>>16853765
Yeah, this never happened.

>>16853950
So pointing out more marketing pushes helps your case about another marketing push? These things obviously work, people are dumb and will follow what the commercials tell them to do.
Just because eggs are a better option than literal mass produced sugar foods, doesn't mean our idea of a daily breakfast isn't from the same advertising tree

>>16853950
>Which one doesn't belong?
Belong where? In your retarded arbitrary list?

Hey everyone this is the ketoschizo that lies every single day for 16 hours a day on a Malaysian carpetweaving forum and will call you a vegan if you disagree with it

>>16853930
Americans have been eating bacon and eggs since colonial times, watch Townsends or read cookbooks from hundreds of years ago.

>>16853985
Why do you think there aren't any egg brands like there are processed food brands? Coca-Cola buys superbowl commercials. "Egg" producers have to form a union to afford any advertising at all.

There's clearly a tremendous gap in profitability.

>>16853998
Here's a body photo of the guy you're talking about.

Don't eat eggs unless you want to look like this.

>>16853930
>the pork and poultry associations
Who? Why do pork and poultry have "associations" but sugar has Coca-Cola and Pepsi?

>>16853998
>>16854040
Here's the full size photo so people can get a better look at this disgusting ketolard. He's the only person on 4chan who advocates eating eggs. Every post you see about eating eggs or meat, it's 100% guaranteed to be this ketolard.

>>16854048
That's a post from /fit/, it's not you. Post your own physique.

>>16854069
It's the /fit/ poster this guy was talking about here: >>16853998

The arch-nemesis of vegan shills. Stick around a while and you'll notice vegans post about this guy in almost every thread that talks about nutrition, PUFAs, or carbs.

>>16852911
>fat makes you fat
This single marketing campaign has caused trillions of dollars in damage

>>16854020
Recipes were historically written for the rich or upper middle class.

>>16854032
>>16854044
Sugar does have its own lobbying group. It's not about profitability/profit margins, it's the fact that industries are able to buy politicians and change laws and regulations willynilly. Are you two seriously defending giant lobbying groups determining what happens in a supposed free market?

>>16854212
Yeah Sugar Information Inc. put a lot of effort into convincing people that sugar isn't fattening because people could theoretically count calories and consciously limit their sugar consumption.

But how do you explain the fact that there's no Coca-Cola of eggs? Egg buyers shop based on properties like organic, pastured, soy-free, etc. There's no room for brand-names with huge markups. No egg producer has the enormous profits needed to buy superbowl commercials like Coca-Cola.

>>16854238
So it's cool for industries to subvert the government so long as they're not overly profitable? Got it.

>>16854238
>soy free eggs
Umm, anon...

>>16854212
I don't get this "Adam Ruins Everything" view of history, generalizing history into sweeping narratives or reducing everything into simple cause and effect, "This is why you do X!" Might be an evolution of the Whiggish view of history as the only parties in America are all descendants of Whigs.

>>16854123
Literally nobody says this.

>>16854238
Thin people eat sugar too, it's not sugar's fault it's too tasty or that lardasses can't moderate themselves. Walk into an ice cream shop and there will be plenty of thin people.

>>16854238
Coca Cola has a specific recipe that othrr brands can't replicate and the overwhelming majority of people can't produce cola soda at their homes. Eggs, on the other hand, taste the same no matter the country and everyone with chickens can produce them. Retard.

>>16854244
All the big businesses want to promote plant-based diets. Every meat selling company wishes they could sell plant-based slop instead. They're just having a hard time convincing customers to buy it.

The meat and egg bogeyman is a figment of your imagination.

>>16854655
You're unironically mentally ill.

>>16854293
You can pretend like everything has its own form of natural evolution, which in some cases that's true, but you can also be aware of the realities around you and try to understand the how's and why's of things exist and why they are the way that they are.
Nothing is ever a straightforward answer, but many entities now have vested interest and incentives to get you to act in a certain way or believe certain things.
And this isn't some /pol/ "Da JEWS control everything!!!" conspiracy. More of the natural result of years of crony capitalism in an ever increasing hyper-consumerist society.

>>16854652
>a specific recipe that othrr brands can't replicate
Correct. Processed food provides a huge opportunity for inflated profit margins. Traditional whole foods like eggs have no room for those business practices. This is why there are no large corporations promoting egg consumption.
>Retard.
You failed to put 2 and 2 together. The retard here is you.

>>16854662
>observe reality
>get called mentally ill
Let me guess, you're politically left wing?

>>16854655
>billionaire companies don't want to profit off meat despite it having made them billionaires because they started marketing a less popular product and despite the fact they haven't stopped selling or advertising meat

>>16854638
Not as much anymore. A lot of older people still seem to believe it. Nobody will believe you if you try to say that a lot of people didn't start thinking that way though.

>>16854684
They mean it's calorically dense, which it is.
>>16854682
You don't observe reality, you say incoherent shit that contradicts reality, as explained here: >>16854686

>>16853355
>exsecption
*eggception

>>16854655
>bogeyman
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Egg_Board#Suppression_of_free_marketplace

>National Milk Producers Federation Urges >FDA to Stop Imitators’ Abuse of Dairy Terms
https://www.nmpf.org/nmpf-urges-fda-to-stop-imitators-abuse-of-dairy-terms/

>Cattlemen's Beef Board response to plant-based beef alternatives
https://sentientmedia.org/the-national-cattlemens-beef-association-fears-plant-based-alternatives/
I could go on with plenty more examples.

Not saying alternatives are good or bad, just that there is a lot of money being used to control a narrative and to buy politicians. Money needs to get out of politics in the US first and foremost.

>>16854693
>They mean it's calorically dense, which it is.
>nobody says this, but when they did say it this is what they actually meant
The people saying "fat makes you fat" never talked about calories. It was just about avoiding fat to lose weight. Which didn't really work anyway since most of them continued eating too much processed junk foods which adds calories without making you feel satisfied like real nutritious food. Not sure why you'd try to deny that this happened.

>>16854724
Also 60% of farm bailouts and subsidies in 2020 went to dairy, meat and feed production.

>>16854729
I deny it because you're pulling it out of your ass. What's asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

>>16852892
>thinks egg scare didn't exist until after the late '90s

>>16854759
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/03/28/295332576/why-we-got-fatter-during-the-fat-free-food-boom

>>16854785
Where does it say exactly that people believed eating fat would make them fat regardless of how many calories they consumed?

>>16854836
>"And if we did it by merely replacing milk and cheese and fatty meat with carbohydrates, with pasta and potatoes and rice," Taubes says, the theory was that we would live longer, and be thinner.

>>16854836
Not the anon you've been replying to, but bitch you're retarded,

>>16854893
That has nothing to do with your claim that people believed that fat makes them fat regardless of caloric content.


>>16854896
Cope harder, obese piece of shit.

>>16854893
Also you conveniently omitted the part where it says
>Now, to be fair, the kinds of carbs the authors of the guidelines had in mind were whole grains, fruits and vegetables.
Which are less calorically dense.

>>16854925
>if we eat more pasta instead of fat we'll be thinner
>that has nothing to do with people thinking fat makes them fat

>>16854931
>YOU CONVENIENTLY DID THIS
>GOTCHA
whatever

>>16854961
If obesity is mainly about calories why do people lose more weight on calorie unrestricted higher fat diets relative to calories restricted higher carbohydrate diets.

>>16854925
I don't really understand your misunderstanding.

In the 1950s, Ancel Benjamin Keys's Seven Countries Study put saturated fats as the main cause of a myriad of diseases which typically manifest in overweight or obese people; coronary heart disease, cholesterol and obesity correlated with increased mortality from cancer.
There was a huge push by the sugar industry in the 1960s and 70s to put blame on saturated fats as the cause of obesity. Key's was also instrumental in this, heavily criticizing and discrediting the book, Pure, White and Deadly, which aimed to put the blame on CHD on sugar, not fat.
This lead to an increased boon in sales of margarine and low-fat products.
In 1977 the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs released their nutritional guidelines which explicitly stated to try and follow a low-fat diet.
>https://opencommons.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1482&context=srhonors_theses
>While numerous dietary adjustments were recommended in order to improve health, fat was
identified as the most instrumental factor.
This only helped spur the narrative that fat was bad, and because people are dumb as shit, these ideas all boiled down to "fat makes you fat"
You also have to understand the context of the time. Nutritional labeling requirements weren't really a thing until the 1973 when labeling requirements were finally required for all FDA-regulated food.
Prior to this, most food was prepared at home from the raw ingredients, so people didn't think about calories in as much depth as we do today.

>>16855016
>what is glycogen
>what is water weight
Why is it that almost all people who go on Keto just stay morbidly obese? The people who’ve gone from morbidly obese to a healthy weight don’t do keto; they eat things like potatoes and fruit.
Fat loss is simple. Eat plants and meats. Don’t eat products.

>>16852849
Big Corn ran the cholesterol agenda in the 50s to maximize corn syrup profits, that's why obesity rose and not decline despite the "health" efforts. The movement was compromised from the start

>>16855016
First off, your photo doesn't say whether they accounted for calories or not in either diet, so we don't know if the high-fat diet was unrestricted calories and the low-fat diet was restricted calories.
But consider the availability of calories between the two groups. In the low-fat group it's easy, just don't eat fats, but basically the whole grocery store is still free game for you. This inherently makes it more difficult to stay true to a calorie-restricted diet just on the availability of food you can eat. Not to mention all the low-fat foods from the 70s-90s low-fat trends. Typically fat people are fat because they have problems with self control.
Now let's look at the high-fat, low-carb, unrestricted calories diet. Well there goes 90% of the grocery store. You can't just grab whatever off the shelf and expect to be able to eat it if you want to adhere to your diet. This artificial limit to calories already sets it miles ahead for weak-willed fatties to avoid all the junky processed foods that are available to the low-fat dieter. This pushes the keto dieter towards a calorie deficit by default.
Show me a ketoer who tracks their calories, routinely eats more calories than their metabolic rate, and still looses weight. I doubt you would find anyone.
Keto isn't some magic bullet diet, it's a restriction diet that helps control a fatty's tendency to just eat whatever trash floats by their mouth.
I could arbitrarily cut out all foods that contain the letter O, but still allow myself to eat unrestricted calories and still lose weight because my options are already severely limited and will naturally edge me toward calorie deficit

Genuinely curious and looking for serious replies:
This man (Dr. Greger) has a over decade of videos on scientific journals and peer-reviewed studies over myriad topics involving the unhealthiness of meat, dairy and eggs. Is he just a crock of shit? He seems genuine and is very quick to point of the double standards and obvious shilling of studies done by mega corps pushing that meat dairy and eggs are "healthy".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtGf2FuzKo4

is this just bullshit then?
not looking for trolls, just honest opinions

>>16853950
Cornflakes because you serve those with milk

>>16854961
Eating more whole grains, fruits and vegetables, you retarded fatass. You can pig out on broccoli and you'll struggle to gain weight by virtue of its caloric density.

>>16854961
Yes, you conveniently omitted something that explicitly contradicts you, fattie.

>>16855129
Not to mention that you have to rely on fatties' self-report.

>>16855185
It's not just mega corps anon. I'm the one autistically posting about lobbying groups in this thread.
Just wait until you realize that the US Dietary Guidelines/1992 release of the Food Pyramid, were partially pushed by the grain lobbyist to promote sales, but also by the USDA themselves to "protect" farmers, and to also lower the cost of providing for America's poor. If they say grains are a good part of the diet, they can feed more people with less money.

Look for incentives. Who benefits by the information given to you or by the products you buy. Most things nowadays aren't done out of the goodness in peoples' hearts, rather money and control.

Specifically in that video they harp on food labeling laws which say foods high in saturated fats/fats in general can't be labeled as healthy or nutritious. Why is that? Who would benefit from this? This world is a push pull game of people and organizations vying for your money and attention, be aware of that when trying to find some truth.

>>16855237
See
>>16854756


Also, source on the claim that the food pyramid was pushed by grain lobbyists?

>>16855185
He is jewish and i don't trust him.

>>16854686
>>16854693
Meat make little money. Egg make little money. Plant-based slop make big money.

Businessman want big money. Businessman want people to buy plant-based slop instead of meat and egg.

>>16855086
I know a few people who had good success with keto, although I believe it's because they stop eating junk food rather than carbs being inherently bad. And I'd assume once most of those people get to a normal weight they'll eventually look for healthy sources of carbs to eat instead of staying on keto forever.

>>16855260
but he does all of his stuff for free, and his profits from his books go to charity
>>16855237
what would be the incentive for Dr. Greger to push me away from meat and dairy and towards more fruits and vegetables and whole grains? does he have anything to gain from it?

or am I missing the point and you are saying the dairy industry would benefit from labeling saturated fat as healthy? sorry I am new to this whole world of "figuring out what to listen to" in health and food products

>>16854724
>Cattlemen's Beef Board
Who even is this? How much money and power do they have compared to a single processed food company like say, for example, Coca-Cola?

You're suffering from a mental delusion where you imagine a power dynamic that doesn't exist. All the power in lobbying is overwhelmingly in the hands of plant-based companies.

See: >>16854682

You're trying to distract people with a mouse (farmer/worker unions) when the problem is a herd of elephants (agrochemical corporations, food processors, pharma industry).

>>16855284
to clarify and add another thought:
who benefits from using scientific study evidence (not funded by a corp looking to talk its product up) to show that saturated fat in any form is likely to raise your cholesterol and blood pressure, leading to potential heart disease? because all that does is tell people to not give money to dairy farmers imo, unless that is what someone else wants me to do for some reason

>>16855267
>Meat make little money. Egg make little money. Plant-based slop make big money.
Yeah, I'm sure BK gets the bulk of their profits from Impossible whoppers and not the burgers they've been selling for decades, retard. Also let's ignore how the bulk of farm subsidies goes to dairy, meat and feed.

>>16855086
Everyone I know who did keto lost weight and got off all their medication.

I've seen more keto success stories by far than any other diet. And not only do people lose weight they cure diabetes and hypertension.

By contrast there are more people making ex-vegan videos where they talk about their health being destroyed than there are vegan success stories.

>>16855086
Aside from anecdotes there are all sorts of scientific papers showing ketogenic or low-carb diets have far better success than anything else.

Keto is so effective that eating unlimited amounts of fat and protein works better than calorie restriction while eating carbs.

>>16855361
You can't break the laws of thermodynamics, fattie. Let me know when you post a study on people in a controlled environment. Fatties are notoriously unreliable on their assessment of how much they eat.

>>16855185
>Is he just a crock of shit?
Yeah, he's just a liar like every other vegan. Everything he says about health is a lie because he thinks it is morally okay to lie to save animals.

Vegan lies about health are basically obliterated at this point in time. You should read the book The Vegetarian Myth by Lierre Keith.

Here's also a good ex-vegan video that you should watch. Veganism is a dangerous anti-human ideology.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7sHlB4Yxb8

>>16855281
Carbs are fattening because they increase hunger and lower metabolism. Processed carbs are worse for the same reason refined morphine is a stronger drug than poppy seeds.

>>16855319
If businessmen could wave a magic wand and make all consumers on earth buy plant-based slop, do you think they would? (HINT: plant-based is more profitable. businessmen want MORE profit, not LESS)

Once you acknowledge what they want is for consumers to buy the plant-based substitutes, it becomes ludicrous to suggest they are pouring money and effort into convincing people to eat meat.

Your delusion is opposite to reality. They are pouring money and effort into tricking people to NOT eat meat. This is why the supposed meat bogeyman that vegans ITT came up with is a cattle farmer union. LMAO. Not a single corporation promotes meat. Just cattle ranchers themselves.

>>16855384
Shawn Baker is pre-diabetic and has the testosterone levels of a girl lmao

>>16855384
how does he lie if he has literal decades of studies backing everything he has said, including proof of dairy and meat corps twisting their own studies and wording it specifically to make meat and dairy "healthy"?

and in regards to the video, this top comment sums it up best:
>I totally agree that vegans should be extra careful with their nutrition and especially they shouldn't ignore cravings and other symptoms. I think we can tackle deficiencies by understanding what nutrients we are missing, and get those, from plants or from animals according to our preferences and values. I wouldn't necessarily blame everything that happened to you to veganism, to be frank. Warning people on the other hand side is a good idea. If you felt like you were lacking nutrients you shouldn't have ignored it, our health is the most important thing. I'm just sad to see that you blame everything to veganism... vegan diets can be really healthy or really unhealthy according to how things are done.
by the way your picture is some facebook boomer tier nonsense

>>16855419
Yeah, retard, they definitely want people to stop buying the burgers they've been selling for decades and which have made them billionaires. Also you're a lying piece of shit, the bulk of farm subsidies goes to dairy, meat and cattle feed.

>>16855378
People are separated into two groups. One group is told they can eat UNLIMITED calories as long as it is fat and protein. The other group is told they must RESTRICT calories because calories are important (no matter where they come from).

Which group loses more weight? (HINT: This has been replicated many times.)

>>16855420
And he got high cholesterol too

>>16854638
my dad thinks this

>>16855419
you are so close yet so far anon
there is a shift in what is accepted in society as normal, in this case its the acceptance of plant-based meals being non-stigmatized.
so, why not jump in and cash in on it? they want one thing, money. how to get money? get on board of the latest trend. no one is yelling at people to "eat meat" because that's what people have done forever, along with farms allowed to stay open because uncle sam wants them to

>>16855435
Again, let me know when you post a study in a controlled environment. For all I know, the high carb group could have eaten more calories than they reported.

>>16855425
He lies about things like LDL cholesterol and saturated fat causing heart disease. A tired old debunked lie that vegans can't drop because they think lying is okay to save animals.

>LDL-C does not cause cardiovascular disease: a comprehensive review of the current literature
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30198808/

He also lies about the effectiveness of ketogenic diets even though they are proven to save lives. He's okay with telling lies that will lead to human suffering and death. Typical vegan.

>being such a lardass you think there's an evil conspiracy to make you eat vegetables.
Kek

>>16855429
Guys who make little money (e.g. Cargill) want to make big money like Coca-Cola.

It's weird that you can't acknowledge the simple fact that corporations want MORE money. Not less money. MORE money.

Plant-based = MORE money.
Corporations = plant-based advocates.

See pic related: >>16854682

All financial interests are aligned on this. All of them. Pharma, food, agrochem. There's nobody but the little guys like ranchers themselves trying to protect real food.

>>16855482
You're literally claiming that selling meat is counterproductive to fast food companies based on literally nothing. No statistic, nothing.

>>16855447
What do you think needs to be controlled? Why? Explain very clearly your thought process here. I suspect you aren't capable of human thought.

When comparing two pieces of diet advice all you need to do is separate people into two groups and give them different diet advice. That's it.

Do you think advising people to eat UNLIMITED calories of fat and protein or advising people to eat RESTRICTED calories including carbs works better?

Many times the same thing has been done. It turns out unlimited calorie low-carb works better than restricting calories.

>>16855495
The huge financial interests behind the plant-based movement aren't hidden. They are open about it. Cargill themselves support the plant-based agenda. They want people to eat less meat and more slop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbNDrcoRi8g

The image I have drawn your attention to several times (>>16854682) shows businesses supporting plant-based diet reform.

>>16855517
You're moving the goalposts. You claimed selling "plant-based slop" is more profitable than selling meat. Go ahead and prove it.

>>16855497
A controlled environment is one where patients are constantly monitored.

>>16852849
The same way they have managed to make people believe sugar is bad for you.

>>16855466
>"A large body of evidence shows there were once enormous swaths of the world where the coronary heart disease epidemic seemed to be almost non-existent, such as rural China and sub-Saharan Africa. It’s not genetics: When people move from low- to high-risk areas, their disease rates appear to skyrocket as they adopt the diet and lifestyle habits of their new homes. The extraordinarily low rates of heart disease in rural China and Africa have been attributed to the extraordinarily low cholesterol levels among these populations. Though Chinese and African diets are very different, they are both centered on plant-derived foods, such as grains and vegetables. By eating so much fiber and so little animal fat, their total cholesterol levels averaged under 150 mg/dL, similar to people eating contemporary strictly plant-based diets.
>According to William C. Roberts, editor in chief of the American Journal of Cardiology, the only critical risk factor for atherosclerotic plaque buildup is cholesterol, specifically elevated LDL cholesterol in our blood. To drastically reduce LDL cholesterol levels, it appears we need to drastically reduce our intake of trans fat, which comes from processed foods and naturally from meat and dairy; saturated fat, found mainly in animal products and junk foods; and, playing a lesser role, dietary cholesterol, found exclusively in animal-derived foods, especially eggs.
>Notice the pattern? The three boosters of bad cholesterol—the number-one risk factor for our number-one killer—all stem from eating processed foods and animal products. This likely explains why populations living on traditional diets revolving around whole plant foods have largely remained free from the epidemic of heart disease."

why does the overwhelming evidence around the world say otherwise?
sounds like you just want reasons to hate people who happen to be vegan for some reason. some vegans don't give a shit about the animals themselves, just their own health

>>16855525
Just compare Coca-Cola profit with meat processor profits. It's very slim.

Who buys superbowl commercials? Coca-Cola.

I've mentioned Coca-Cola a lot. Are you unfamiliar with them?

>>16855466
http://www.onlinejacc.org/content/70/24/2979
https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/38/32/2459/3745109

>>16855534
Low cholesterol actually kills people. This isn't debatable at this point. The fact that vegans still cling to the lie shows how deluded they are.

>>16855549
Check the conflict of interest on that "consensus panel". It's the biggest statin shills on planet earth.

Vegans (>>16855185):
>noooo the egg board funded a study showing eggs are okay that means all evidence showing eggs are okay can't be trusted!

Also vegans (>>16855549):
>look at this opinion piece written by big pharma
>it says cholesterol is bad so you should take their statins
>also it proves never eat meat checkmate carnists
>ignore all the nonbiased papers showing the opposite

>>16855289
>You're trying to distract people with a mouse (farmer/worker unions) when the problem is a herd of elephants (agrochemical corporations, food processors, pharma industry).
They're all problems

>>16855541
Coca Cola isn't a burger company so using them as proof that meat isn't profitable is akin to pointing at Ford to prove that selling shoes isn't profitable because they don't sell shoes, you massive retard.
You said it's in the interests of fast food companies not to sell meat, Coca Cola is irrelevant here. They're not the ones selling Impossible Burgers.
Prove that Burger King or any other fast food company that sells meat has any interest in selling less meat. A single statistic helping your point. A single economic study that shows they'd benefit from selling less meat.

>>16855558
>Low cholesterol actually kills people. This isn't debatable at this point. The fact that vegans still cling to the lie shows how deluded they are.
I don't think you're understanding. Yes, it does, and so does high cholesterol. Vegans aren't running around screaming to eliminate their cholesterol altogether, they are actively trying to lower it from an already high average across this obese nation.
Just because people point out eating a healthy and well-balanced plant-based diet lowers the cholesterol gained form meat and dairy, does not mean they want you to lower your cholesterol to unsafe levels

>>16855572
Cattle ranchers and egg farmers produce healthy food.

Plant-based corporations are causing the largest amount of death and human suffering in human history. Animal suffering and death, too, if you care about that (you don't).

>>16855549
>>16855558
>>16855568
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ujl3p1wOQ-U

its all about relative perspective isn't it, all about who wants you to think what way

>>16855572
Oh and cattle ranchers also regenerate the environment. Ruminants are essential to sustainable agriculture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J09eLkEM718

Cattle ranchers are good guys. Megacorporations are bad guys. All the megacorporations are pushing plant-based, including Cargill.

Your world view is very twisted.

>>16855617
>billionare pharma trying to make money harming you
>vs medical doctors trying to save your life
Yeah, all about perspective.

Statins are poison. The fact that Michael Greger is a statin apologist just shows what a scumbag he is. He uses pharma lies as a platform to promote his anti-human diet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_QdNX9etCg

>>16855635
what the hell is an anti-human diet?

>>16853351
Yes, assuming your farm doesn't answer to a higher corporation. Now what really makes the jews seethe is producing your own food. Chickens, gardens, yards, etc. There's a reason they want us all to live in bug blocks, and are actively brainwashing millennials and zoomers to think that owning land is bad.

>>16855610
Not sure what strawman you're building of me, but I'm not vegan or vegetarian. Industrial ag is a problem and the green revolution simultaneously saved billions of lives and will end many, many more in due time.

Cattle, pork and poultry, when raised right, is tite. The reality of it is that 70% of beef, 95%+ poultry and pork are all raised in a factory farm setting in the united states.
You say that plant-based corps are encouraging a large amount of suffering and death, yet these factory farms play into the same systems that plant-based foods rely on as well.
Unless you eat ethically-sourced meat products, you're contributing to the same problem you're complaining about.

Plant-based or not, our entire food system has been subverted by corporations, lobbyists and bought politicians all in the name of money. It's a cancer that is making vast swaths of the population sick, and it's been spreading to the rest of the world since the green revolution. We're sitting at about 70% of adults over 20 being overweight or obese right now, that number is just going to keep on shooting up all while you retards bicker about which coonsoomering lifestyle is the best consoomerism lifestyle.

Buy whole foods, buy foods that are grown in ways that don't deplete the soils, that don't grow in a fucking modified desert (CA). Know the farmer who slaughtered your meat, who picks your eggs and milks their cows. If the food you eat is a mystery to you, you're doing it wrong.

>>16855649
A diet which harms humans to (supposedly) save animals.

>fast food companies that have made fortunes and continue to make fortunes by selling meat products and don't show any signs of intending to sell less meat are somehow scheming to get people not to eat meat
>introducing a vegan burger to appeal to a new market is a sign they don't want people to eat meat
>introducing a vegan burger somehow means they want to get rid of their way larger meat sales
>fast food companies want to make money by supposedly selling less of the meat products that has made them earn fortunes for decades
>the proof that selling meat isn't profitable for fast food companies is that a soda company doesn't sell meat
Seriously, is this retardation, schizophrenia or dishonesty? Not even on /x/ people would claim burger chains somehow want people to not eat meat.

>>16855668
I'm just pointing out that it's a figment of your imagination to think a meat bogeyman is tricking people into eating meat.

All the financial interests are aligned towards less meat, more plant-based slop.

>>16855697
>don't show any signs of intending to sell less meat
This is your brain on a plant-based diet.

>>16855688
I am now convinced you have just been a troll this whole time. Dr. Greger isn't even a vegan because of the animals at all, he is vegan because of his health only.
And the fact that you think eating less meat and more vegetables is somehow bad for humans, along with you posting that clearly bait-worthy image, tells me all I need to know about you.

>>16855722
This is the logic these people display: >>16855697. Either they don't argue in good faith or they have mental issues. They are unironically arguing that BK wants people not to eat meat and that meat production is environmentally better than agriculture.

>>16855722
Veganism is extremely harmful to humans. Here's a video you should watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7sHlB4Yxb8

Here's a book you should read:
http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=1E16CE926E8656317EA6E535E4083180

>>16855738
Every business wants to make more money, not less money. Selling plants makes more money than selling meat. Do you think there are an infinite number of customers? Every customer that buys a plant-based alternative instead of meat is a win for corporations.

I'm having a hard time understanding your brain malfunction here. Explain your logic more clearly. Why do you think BK (or any business) WOULDN'T want all their meat-eating customers to become plant-based customers?

If a real burger makes 'x' profit while a veggie burger makes 2x profit, then they preferably want to sell everyone a veggie burger.

>>16855698
It can be both at the same time dude. There are bad players from the meat industry and bad players from the plant-based. It's not black or white.

>>16855792
Cargill supports the plant-based movement.

The "bad players" in the meat industry don't even want to sell meat. They'd rather eliminate meat and cattle ranchers entirely. They want the big plant-based dollars. It's difficult to figure out how to get everyone eating plant slop instead of meat, but they are trying.

The crux of the discussion is whether a meat bogeyman exists that is trying to get everyone to eat meat. The proof so far offered was a cattle rancher union. Laughable.

>>16855769
>If a real burger makes 'x' profit while a veggie burger makes 2x profit, then they preferably want to sell everyone a veggie burger.
You've yet to prove that vegan burgers are more profitable. Also even if a tenth of regular burger eaters started vegan burgers instead, their meat market would still be larger.

>>16855818
Companies don't try to lose money. Telling people "eat meat instead of plants" will make them lose money. Telling people "eat plants instead of meat" makes them more money.

Simple.

They're not going to stop selling meat to people who aren't willing to buy plant-based slop. They're just going to do everything they possibly can to get people to eat the plant-based slop instead of meat. Including lobbying, funding bogus studies, advertising, etc.

>>16855832
Still copping out. I'm getting tired of your tinfoil hat bullshit. Prove empirically that "plant-based slop" is more profitable than selling regular burgers or stop wasting my time. The fact that there's a larger market for meat that won't diminish any time soon is already proof that meat is more profitable. You've posted zero evidence, not a single stat or study backing your bullshit.

>>16855817
You've posted zero evidence yourself.

>>16855841
>tinfoil hat bullshit
I'm referencing public well-known companies, like Coca-Cola. They have very visible ad campaigns and can even afford superbowl commercials. Hopefully this visual aid helps.

The difference in profit margins between animal-based foods and plant-based foods is immense. Extraordinary. It's an order of magnitude different. And as already noted Cargill is lobbying for plant-based food, not meat.

You have reality upside down. Even your "tinfoil hat" accusation is backwards. You are imagining a meat conspiracy that doesn't exist.

>>16855862
I've posted all sorts of evidence. What are you looking for? Evidence of the huge corporate plant-based agenda? It's in this video which was posted here (>>16855517)

Here's the link again so you don't get lost:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbNDrcoRi8g

Pic also related (reposted because you're playing dumb).

>>16855875
You're an idiot. I don't care about Coca Cola, I want proof that it's more profitable for companies that sell meat to sell plant-based products instead of milk.

>>16855890
instead of meat*

>>16855890
Cargill thinks plant-based alternatives are more profitable. See: >>16855889

It's easy to believe when you compare products like Coca-Cola to meat. There's no meat that can be sold for as large a markup as Coca-Cola sells sugar. There's no brand-name in the meat industry that matches Coca-Cola.

I'm just explaining the world around you that you can see with your own eyes. You seem to be severely delusional. Just look at what businesses exist and what don't exist. Even Trump couldn't sell brand name steaks for a markup.

>>16855875
>sugar and water is profitable
>ThIS mUSt MeAn AlL PLaNTs aRe ThIS pRofiTabLE!
holy fuck you are retarded

>>16855889
Your logic makes no sense. You're arguing that meat-selling companies would stand to benefit from selling plant-based products instead of meat based on the sales of a company that doesn't sell meat. You might as well argue that it'd be more profitable for Apple to sell earphones instead of cellphones because there are companies that only sell earphones.

>eggs increase cholesterol
>cholesterol causes artery clogging
It's settled science chuds get your vaxx.

>>16855926
I never said that.

Name a company selling meat which rivals Coca-Cola.

>>16855926
Uh oh, starbucks is also insanely profitable. Must be the plants
Or, wait, maybe it's because they're selling something that's 90% water and water is basically free in food production.

>>16855948
Yes Starbucks is insanely profitable because of their plant-based foods. Good observation. Their animal-based foods bring far less profit.

Likewise McDonalds makes most profit from french fries (potatoes fried in vegetable oil).

If you had pattern recognition you might notice a pattern here.

>>16855926
>akshually it'd be more profitable for Walmart to only sell toilet paper instead of all the things they sell because there are companies that make billions just from selling toilet paper!!!!1

I can't do keto, i literally felt like dying 6 days in.

I'm trying a ray peat oriented diet now with tons of fruits, sugar, carbs and tons of protein. I drink 1-2 liters of milk a day and feel fucking amazing on it. I think all the Keto and fasting shit fucked up my metabolism and to finally feel the heat of my cells radiating from my own body after indulging in milk and orange juice feels fucking great holy fuck

>>16855651
>assuming your farm doesn't answer to a higher corporation.
Fun fact the liberal crowd always tries to hide: only .5% of US farms are non-family corporate owned, with 1.5% of the total farm land.

>>16855939
Rivals in what? Size?
JBS FOODS
But the comparison isnt fair, because meat sellers dont really need to advertise their brand as much as the sugar companies.

>>16852849
Trans fats were seen as the devil (not saying they were good) which people at large took to seeing all fats as the devil thanks to media sensationalism, even if you literally need them to survive. And because boomers couldn’t stop eating like garbage they got a ton of cholesterol related issues, which led to eggs being seen as bad because of muh cholesterol. Just keep in mind that these fucks can’t even make a food pyramid right and are filled with bribery/corruption, so any word on foodstuffs from them should always be taken with skepticism.

>>16855971
Imagine Walmart sells two types of toilet paper. One type makes $0.10 profit per roll. The other type makes $1.00 profit per roll. Their existing customer base buys a fixed amount of toilet paper.

Does Walmart want their customers to buy the toilet paper which makes less profit or the toilet paper which makes more profit?

>>16855963
Shucks, must suck to be a cattle farmer when they could just learn to make soda or brew coffee. No profits there to be made, must mean no one tries to get people to buy beef.
I'm surprised there's anyone even raising livestock anymore when they could just sell soda or french fries.
I guess this is just how the world works because I'm too stupid to understand things.

>>16856017
>cattle ranchers
>every single food processor, pharma, and agrochemical corporation
Vegans can't tell the difference.

>>16856008
Jesus, the more expensive toilet paper is more expensive precisely because nobody wants to buy it, retard. Learn some basic economics. If more people started buying it, its price would decrease. And if people ate less meat, itd price would increase.

>>16856008
They want them to buy both, otherwise they wouldn't stock both.

>>16856052
No no, walmart only wants people to buy coca cola and high profit margin toilet paper.
Last time I went to walmart it was just thirty isles of the two items.

>>16856052
>They want them to buy both, otherwise they wouldn't stock both.

>>16856060
It's funny how he thinks plant-based burgers are more profitable because they are more profitable because they are more expensive when this is so precisely because nobody wants to buy them lmao

>>16856060
Check out this article but maybe first you should use a dictionary to look up words like "substitute".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meat_analogue

>>16856074
because they are more expensive*

>>16856074
99% of a plant-based burgers' mass is coca cola and high margin toilet paper

>>16856074
They are more profitable because the ingredients are cheaper. Like every other food item. As we discussed with Starbucks and McDonalds.

>>16852849
Eggs are like the best food ever. Eggs are fucking based.

>>16856084
Beef farmers should feed their herd coca cola and high margin toilet paper to maybe impart some of the value onto the cattle

>>16856100
>*holds up spork*
lol so random

>>16856090
Yeah eggs are super nutritious and cheap. Very bad for most corporations including the medical industry.

>>16853371
I literally eat 15-20 raw eggs a day + 250g of butter + 500ml raw milk + 500g steak rare or medium rare
Never have I felt better my entire life!

>>16853444
HDL and LDL are not Cholesterol!
Cholesterol is one thing and is the fundemental piece in every single cell in your body, you are pretty muh made out of cholesterol and saturated fats

HDL and LDL are actually transporters, if they are high, it means blood pressure is high which means there could make blocked arteries which would kill you in a few years if you dont change, thats whats causes heart disease

But now think with your brainlet brain, why would cholesterol block the arteries ? well, cholesterol is used to do healing in your blood vessels; whenever there is a problem cholesterol rushes to heal the inflammation. which most always succeds EXCEPT FOR VEGETABLE OILS WHICH CONTAIN PLANT CHOLESTEROL
ANOTHER THING IS THERE IS HIGH INFLAMMATION CAUSED FROM CARBS AND SUGAR, WITHOUT CARBS THUS NO INFLAMMATION THERE IS NO RISK TO EATING EVEN 50 EGGS A DAY !

>>16856256
I never even mentioned the word "cholesterol", brainlet.

>>16853980
It did yeah, this has been an issue with scientific research in regards to the food, drug, and various other industries; those industries control the lab conditions and directly fund the studies those scientists create which creates work conditions that railroad certain results artificially and/or strongarm researchers with the threat of removing their funding to give the company the results that they want. That's how we got shit like doctors giving women shit like meth for almost anything under the sun and how they said that research shows that smoking is good for your health. It's rather unfortunate because this deep seated corruption is what is causing people nowadays to distrust science as a whole.

>>16856222
Nobody cares Joe

>>16856309
nutrition science is so shit you can find and prove whatever you want too

>>16852849
Muh cholesterol. My family is full of self-described healthnuts that eat a pound of spinach/kale every day, and they think milk and egg are two of the worst things you can eat, right after "sugar".

>>16856471
>eat a pound of spinach/kale every day
are they all anemic?

>>16856471
Sounds pretty based. Do people really need to consume milk, eggs and refined sugars? Probs not.

>>16856481
>Do people really need to consume milk, eggs and refined sugars?
milk and eggs can provide nutrients that many people are deficient in, sugar is devoid of nutrients and not necessary to consume for optimal health

>>16856466
idk about that but the main issue with industrial scientific research is that the government allows corruption at every corner to allow profitmaxxing.

>>16852849
>How did they ever manage to convince anyone that eggs are actually bad for you?
So there was a US Gov't study that looked into rising health problems specifically heart disease. Their conclusion was that to much red meat (specifically beef) was the problem. Of course the beef producers threw a hissy fit. So they watered the recommendations down to "don't eat fatty food." There then followed 30 years of replacing all fats in processed with sugars, of branding any fatty food as unhealthy and of skyrocketing obesity rates and heart problems.

But at least beef production wasn't adversely affected.

>>16856474
No, to be fair they're in very good health overall, and they're not vegans either. But they have a view that milk is basically poison for adults otherwise God wouldn't have created us to develop lactose intolerance with age, and that anything GMO or "processed" is also poison and unnatural. Some of their views on staple grains are borderline Kaczynski-esque. When they do eat meat, they exclusively eat free-range organic meat.
>>16856481
It's not just refined sugars they're against. They believe that as many calories as possible should come from protein, and that fat and sugar are basically pure filler promoted by a corrupt government-corporate alliance seeking to create a cattle race of humans.

>>16856508
>Their conclusion was that to much red meat (specifically beef) was the problem.
no it wasnt. this is a lie, saturated fat consumption ASSOCIATED with slightly higher CVD risk (very small hazard ratios ~1.1-1.3), then when it was actually tested in rigorous clinical trials it failed and failed and failed but the recommendations persist

>>16856512
>They believe that as many calories as possible should come from protein, and that fat and sugar are basically pure filler
do they know about essential fatty acids? you have to eat at least some fat and specifically you want enough DHA for optimal brain development/health

>>16856518
They eat flaxseed shakes daily for that.

>>16856521
thats okay i guess. the ALA to DHA conversion is quite inefficient though and its much more bio availabile from fish

>>16856532
They do eat at least some fish but I forget which, I'd have to ask them. They were big on salmon filets over a decade ago but came to the conclusion that nearly all salmon is factory-farmed dye-injected trash and stopped eating it.

>>16856537
tell them about deenz

>>16856512
>fat and sugar are basically pure filler promoted by a corrupt government-corporate alliance seeking to create a cattle race of humans
yanno.... they might just be on to something with this

>>16856602
There are essential fatty acids you have to eat but there are no essential sugars.

>>16856612
sure and we need to parse out avocado fats from the gunk found in margarine

>>16856512
Your family sounds based af

>>16856647
How about coconut or olive oil? Or the fats in meats and fish?

>>16856222
Based. Wish I could get raw dairy.

>>16856735
raw milk has no nutritional benefits over regular milk.

>>16856738
But it sounds cooler

>>16856738
I can get raw cheese aged over 6 months and it's much better tasting. Raw milk probably tastes better. And I've heard cooking with raw dairy tastes better too.

Pasteurization laws are a scam. Imagine if all spinach had to be sold precooked but only a government certified middlemen was allowed to cook it.

>>16856738
raw milk cheese is tasty

>>16853355
How do you expect to grow large like Gaston on just 2 eggs?

Ah yes, I too love consuming blood, mucus, and various parasites from farm animals' milk-sacs, really gives my dishes a certain je ne sais quoi

>>16856776
>>16856775
taste does not equal nutrition.

>>16856821
It usually does, as long as you're not talking about modern processed food. Every animal finds what's most nutritious for it to be the tastiest. Wouldn't make sense for an animal to evolve disliking what it should be eating.

>>16856870
Lead acetate tastes sweet and was used to sweeten wine. Probably lead to tons of deaths. A myriad of different berries are highly toxic yet are sweet and pleasant to eat.
Not to mention enjoyable tastes are heavily influenced by culture. Surströmming tastes fine to swedes but is a turn off for most of the world.

I stopped eating eggs because that egg aftertaste every time you burped for the entire day was really starting to disgust me

>>16856916
faggot

>>16856924
no u

>>16856930
I'm not complaining about my burpies

>>16853930
Aha Jew, its funny how you weave in the lies amongst the truth. Yes today's breakfast is purely marketing, but today's breakfast is carbs and sugars, like toast with jam and orange juice, or waffles or pancakes. Our food pyramid is carb overload with little meat. Maybe the 1950s diet was marketing for surplus of eggs and pork but certainly not today. Also I'd doubt the accuracy of that link as that time was between wars and part of the great depression. They had a surplus of grains not meat and eggs.
Fucking Jews.

antisemitism is a sign of mental illness

>>16856941
At least my breath doesn't smell like eggs all day

>>16856952
take your meds and go back to /pol/
literally the entire post and all my posts in this thread are going against the consoomerism jewery that surrounds our daily life, learn to fucking read you complete retard.

>>16856905
Won't find much wine sweetened with lead in nature. That's why I said it's usually true though, not always. You can have a few examples where it's not true but many more where it is.

>>16853898
>American Egg Board shill thread
EGGS
https://youtu.be/SsjJ1WWrV20

>>16856992
You won't find wine in nature period.

>>16858973
Surprisingly, you will. It's called rotten fruit and animals do get drunk on that shit.

>>16856775
It doesn't really taste that different
t. regularly drinks it

>>16853355
How do you misspell exception that badly and not even work egg in there? Go to your room.

>>16852849
Did they? I always knew eggs were good for you and so did my parents.

>>16852849
When the condition of the chicken was analyzed and when the body produced side effects(phlegm, acne).

>>16852849
This makes me so mad, same thing with "fruits have sugar so they're bad for you!"

People seriously don't know the difference between natural sugars and processes sugars, its unreal

>>16856707
They are but I cannot accept giving up eggs and milk

>>16854638
Almost everyone over 30 who isn't explicitly into fitness or nutrition says it.

>>16862893
>"fruits have sugar so they're bad for you!"
where is the lie?

>>16856707
you sound retarded

>>16855445
you mentally ill vegan, you make like there is a huge conpsiracy to prop up meat and eggs
get real

>>16855933
>You might as well argue that it'd be more profitable for Apple to sell earphones instead of cellphones because there are companies that only sell earphones.
bad analogy

>>16853976
you just proved his point

>>16856738
>>16856821
shut up faggot

>>16863452
>greek yogurt

>>16853355
>confusing dietary and serum cholesterol

>>16863398
Sugar is only bad in high amounts. You're going to have a very hard time consuming that much sugar from unprocessed fruit. Fruit also digests slower and contains other compounds that help control blood sugar.

Nobody has become overweight and unhealthy because of fruit. I used to think the same thing once I started learning more about nutrition and how much sugar was added to everything, that fruit must also be bad since it has sugar, but it's not true. I'd feel crappy after drinking a soda but feel pretty good after eating fruit.

>>16863678
>Sugar is only bad in high amounts
this is like saying poison is bad in high amounts you retard, just because your precious sugar is unprocessed doesn't make it special it will the same effect on your body.
Keep enjoying those mutant freaks not even your ancesters would imagine to eat. Get dunked on

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2g-OW-NZcY

>>16863718
Yeah but we're not just talking about the sugar in fruit. Eating a piece of fruit isn't going to affect your body the same way a soda will. Fruit is more than just sugar.

We have tastebuds for sweetness for a reason. Sugar isn't inherently poison, although it becomes that way when refined and consumed in high amounts along with a generally poor diet full of processed food.

>>16863765
Sugar is inherently poison for we have no need for it, that why non alcoholic fatty liver exists diabetes type 2, cavities etc. Just because you've been brainwashed into preferring fruits doesn't make it ok. It will you fuck you up the same way as soda just in a longer timespan, everything else is just cope.

>>16863867
>Sugar is inherently poison for we have no need for it
Our body can produce enough cholesterol without us having to eat any but you probably don't consider that poison, do you?

Calories are just used for energy while protein is also used to repair organs/build muscle.

There's no bad calories. Food only become bad if you perceive it as dangerous and bad because that triggers defence mechanism such as gut problems, fat storage etc.

You can get any result you want with statistics and "studies"

not all eggs are bad, anons

>>16863867
Sugar is not what causes diabetes, retarded fatass. Just because you are obese doesn't give you the right to ruin sugar for eeverybody else.

>>16862950
Yet not a single one of you ketopigs has proven it.

>>16860376
>knew
Peasant myths are not knowledge.

>>16863718
>sugar LE BAD
lmao it really makes you assblasted to see thin people have sugar, doesn't it, you lardass control freak? You can't eat like a normal person so you don't want others to eat sugar at all. You will NEVER ban sugar no matter how much momscience you post.

>>16854638
See, there's someone who thinks fat makes you fat right here: >>16863994

For those curious:
>Kellogg's- Revenue:13.547 billion, operating income:1.706 billion, Net income: 1.344 billion.

>PepsiCo- Revenue:70.37 billion, operating income:10.29 billion, Net income: 7.353 billion.
Co

>General Mills-Revenue:17.63 billion, Operating income: 2.6 billion, Net income: 2.18 billion.

>Coca-Cola- Revenue:37.27 billion, Operating income 10.09 billion, Net income: 8.92 billion.
Mainly grain, soda, vegetable-based companies.

>JBS S.A- Revenue:53 billion, Operating income: 298 million, Net income: 138 million.

Not hard to argue that the attempt to get more people to eat plant-based meats is to get a cut of the profit and increase their net income. Plus it may be too late to enter the breaded chicken frozen food market due to Tyson.

>Tysonn's foods- Revenue 43.185 billion, Operating income: 3.449 billion, Net Income: 2.061 billion.
Tyson is also starting to invest in meat alternatives + "clean" meat.
DFA is a market coop of dairy farmers in the U.S.

>Dairy Farmers of America- Revenue- 13.6 billion, Net income:131.8 million.
Don't bother looking at eggs, the larger companies don't even break 2 billion revenue. Actually, it really is hard to argue that there is a big Egg, Meat, Dairy. They make almost no money compared to the more profitable plant, grain, and potato companies.

>>16864003
https://www.webmd.com/diabetes/features/do-thin-people-get-diabetes
>You don’t have to be overweight or obese to get type 2 diabetes. In fact, you can have high blood sugar even if you look thin. Around 10% to 15% of people with type 2 diabetes are at a healthy weight.

>>16863876
Difference is dietary cholesterol is found in nutritious foods whereas sugar not so much

>>16864347
Good post. Where do you get this data?

>>16864684
Quick wiki search but from the finical sites I skimmed/looked at it is still pretty accurate. Plus the low profitability of milk and eggs should not be too surprising since a surplus of those is not exactly uncommon.

>>16864374
Right, even assuming this doesn't include all the people who had lost weight from diabetes at the time of diagnosis, all the self-reported "healthy weight" types and all the overweight people with hardly any muscle which are technically at a normal BMI, where does it say that sugar causes diabetes?

>>16864677
Fruit seems to be alright. Milk has a fair bit of sugar from lactose too and is nutritious. Anything with a lot of added refined sugar probably isn't that good. But my point was that just because something eaten isn't 100% essential to live doesn't make it poison, because anyone applying that logic to the sugar in fruit will not agree with it when applied to cholesterol in animal products.

>>16864826
>>16864831
Cholesterol IS 100% essential to live. Your body NEEDS exogenous cholesterol, but it does NOT need exogenous sugar. Protein, fat, and cholesterol are essential nutrients, carbohydrates are not.

>>16864880
>Your body NEEDS exogenous cholesterol
is this actually true? pretty sure you can make a bunch of cholesterol. that being said dietary cholesterol is usually found in nutritious foods so it probably isnt something to be avoided

>>16864880
>Cholesterol IS 100% essential to live. Your body NEEDS exogenous cholesterol
It is essential but the liver can produce it. Vegans don't consume cholesterol and have lower levels than omnivores but it never goes down to 0.

>>16854069
3 eggs a day.

>>16853930
>American breakfast as we know it stems from a 1920s marketing campaign by Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud's nephew.


No….. want to know what two sources proteins, other than cheese, were readily a available to medieval commoners?

Ding ding ding. Yes eggs and bacon. Medieval peasants all had chickens and villages often had a bunch of hogs and that’s not getting into the wild pigs that roamed the country side. In cities there were Saint Andrew’s pigs that roamed the cities eating refuse, it was also considered an act of charity to feed them, those pigs would then be slaughtered to feed the poor come winter.

>>16854044
Coca cola uses high fructose corn syrup now mostly

>>16853930
You are retarded and know nothing about food history.

>>16854262
It means the chickens haven't been fed any soy products during their lives. The diets of chickens directly and noticeably impacts their eggs.