/ck/ - Food & Cooking

[Anonymous No.13477810]

This is a completely reasonable approach to eating. Convince me otherwise.

[Anonymous No.13477817]

>>13477810
>Dont tell me what to do, and mind your own business.
This is a completely reasonable approach to living. Convince me otherwise.

[Anonymous No.13477820]

>>13477810
It is, but this is more reasonable

[Anonymous No.13477823]

>>13477810
>walking around hungry and refusing to eat because some faggot said you should "not eat too much"
Beta as fuck.

[Anonymous No.13477827]

>>13477810
>mostly plants
someone post sv3irge

[Anonymous No.13477848]

>>13477823

>he experiences long periods of hunger when eating at caloric maintenance

That's gotta suck. Maybe try laying off the soda and tendies.

[Anonymous No.13477853]

>>13477810
Michael Pollan is such a fucking hack. Holy fuck. I remember reading his stupid book awhile back when it came out. But this is the type of person who sets the precedent for every sub 100 IQ moron in the united states (pretty much the whole population).
>"the ethics of eating animals"
>“In the end each of us has to decide for himself whether eating animals that have died in this manner is okay. For my part, I can’t be sure, because I haven’t been able to see for myself.”
Complete jewing. I'm just glad it's current year and we have our own jewish writers to shoot back like chess pieces. Battle of the jews. That's essentially every news story in academics or culture nowadays.

[Anonymous No.13477859]

>>13477817

[Anonymous No.13477872]

>>13477853

Where is your issue with the assertion that eating factory farmed animals is a personal ethical/ecological choice? Seems to me like he's literally saying, "make up your own mind based on your own principles."

[Anonymous No.13477944]

>>13477810
french fries is plants.

[Anonymous No.13477949]

know how I know you don't exercise and aren't in any kind of shape?
because you think it's possible to eat too much

[Anonymous No.13477961]

>>13477810
i eat a lot of fruit
i recently became addicted to figs

[Anonymous No.13478008]

>>13477810
Because antinutrients are a real thing and not a meme:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowman–Birk_protease_inhibitor

Imagine being such a peasant that you would willingly eat poisonous food just to get your calories.

[Anonymous No.13478014]

>>13478008
You probably shouldnt be a fatass eating fries all day if youre worried about the minute of anti NUTRIENTS in a plant

[Anonymous No.13478021]

>>13478008

>looked up scholarly articles on this
>they're all about its efficacy in fighting cancer

What's the supposed issue?

[Anonymous No.13478031]

>>13477949
too much is relative dumb fuck

[Anonymous No.13478066]

>>13478021
Did you even read the wiki? It’s not even that long...

[Anonymous No.13478082]

>>13478021
>Protease inhibitors are substances that inhibit the actions of trypsin, pepsin and other proteases in the gut, preventing the digestion and subsequent absorption of protein. For example, Bowman–Birk trypsin inhibitor is found in soybeans.

It makes sense that this could be useful in cancer patients, because high protein intake causes cell growth. If you want to slow that process, giving someone what is essentially a protein inhibitor would be a reasonable approach.

This doesn’t mean it’s a good thing for normal healthy people to be consuming though! By that logic healthy people should take a weekly dose of radiation and chemo therapy!

[Anonymous No.13478095]

>>13478014
Did you graduate high school? Why the fuck would he be eating potatoes all day long if he’s talking about avoiding plants due to their antinutrients??

[Anonymous No.13478123]

>>13478066
>>13478082

The only scholarly looking articles I could find relating to the I'll effects of these compounds basically just say that common cooking techniques drastically reduce their affects and that it's unrealistic for them to cause any detectable changes in metabolism in otherwise healthy individuals. Seems like something that's interesting but ultimately benign.

[Anonymous No.13478489]

>>13478123
But why eat something that’s even mildly poisonous intentionally?

[Anonymous No.13478513]

whats the point of eating plants?

have you ever inspected your own shit? like really chopped it up, broke it down? Plants LITERALLY come out your ass in the same little bite sized mush the way they went down your throat. Your body can't do jack fucking shit with them. They pass through your digestive track almost entirely undisgested.

Mushrooms? forget about it. they come out the exact same way they go in.

any kind of seed or nut? you think your digestive tract is some magical machine that just dissolves anything? It isn't. Nuts and seeds come out still hard, still in the same little chunks you bit them into. it is irrelevant what chronometer or whatveer says is in the seed or nut if your body literally can't break it down. linseeds, chia seeds especially. literally just come out the exact same. I have actually eaten linseed bread, taken out the seed from my own fucking shit, and sprouted them just to prove it.

your body wants easily digestible fats - animal fats, and bioavailable proteins - animal proteins. your body wants quick carbs where available - honey, berries, seasonal fruit.

yoyr body DOESNT want some bullshit like indigestible human made mutant plants that have zero bioavailable nutrition (except perhaps macronutrient carb energy, or plant oil energy).

Give your body what it actually wants - easily digestible animal based nutrition.

[Anonymous No.13478525]

>>13477859
>stirner posting on /ck/

[Anonymous No.13478616]

>>13477810
cool anon. i'm glad you found a diet that suits your needs.

[Anonymous No.13478634]

>>13478513
This is a good post but you’re still making plants out of poo

[ia4aeb+dvjk1tz6s38zs@sharklase(...) No.13478677]

>>13477820
>cheese or roast beef
>or

I dont think I will enjoy it more

[Anonymous No.13478678]

>>13478489

>plants contain compounds that theoretically decrease the bioavailability of some nutrients but in actuality don't do it in any measurable way
>they're mildly poisonous

You're reaching. Quite far, really.

[Anonymous No.13478687]

>>13478525
my husband has a t-shirt with stirner on it.

[Anonymous No.13478820]

>>13478513
Don’t do this it spikes your T and makes you a nazi

[Anonymous No.13478846]

>>13477810
>Eat what makes you feel good
>And no, being fat isn't "feeling good"
There's some better advice for you.

[Anonymous No.13478869]

>>13477810
Michael Pollan is a fucking hack. Posting a quote that could come from literally anyone who's studied basic nutrition doesn't change the fact that Michael Pollan is a fucking hack.

[Anonymous No.13479046]

>>13477810
Michael Pollan has some good essays, but ultimately he's cringe for what he said about Emerson.
>>13477853
I don't know why you would describe that as Jewish. Pollan seems to be anti-industrialization and anti-establishment when it comes to both meat and produce.
>I'm just glad it's current year and we have our own jewish writers to shoot back like chess pieces. Battle of the jews. That's essentially every news story in academics or culture nowadays.
This sounds exciting actually. I want to join this battle of the Jews. I've always wanted to marry a Jewess and become an honorary Jew.

[Anonymous No.13479211]

chocolate is mostly plants. so are crisps

[Anonymous No.13479213]

>>13477823
you're mistaking cravings for hunger

[Anonymous No.13479233]

>>13477872
Subjectivity doesn't exist.
>make up your own mind based on your own principles.
translation:
>I'm afraid to make an objective statement about eating factory farmed animals being good, meaning I have doubts, but, j-just do what you think is okay

[Anonymous No.13479504]

>>13477810
I generally like the way this guy frames food in a cultural and social context, as well as his critique of modern farming practices and nutritionism. He's the reason I started doing meatless Mondays, and at this point I'm probably a vegetarian 5 days a week, most weeks. I think if we all would limit the amount of meat we eat by even like 20% it would really help the environment, and maybe farmers would grow something besides corn and soybeans. I don't know why exactly this country has gotten so fat since 1985 but maybe that quote is the way out

[Anonymous No.13479514]

if youre not stuffing your mouth with jars and jars of nutella youre literally eating like a true redditor

eating healthy?
you might as well be drinking a gallon of soy on you every fucking moment

[Anonymous No.13479521]

>>13479211
You will never pass.

[Anonymous No.13479580]

>>13477853
>mentions sub iq
>rants about jews
Okay

[Anonymous No.13479602]

>>13477823
Hunger feels good

[Anonymous No.13479629]

>>13479521
what's this "you will never pass" meme? I see it a lot in all kinds of threads.

[Anonymous No.13479638]

>>13478677
>namefag thinks his input matters
filtered

[Anonymous No.13479641]

>>13479233
Math is literally the only thing that's 100% objective, brainlet.

[Anonymous No.13479647]

>>13479641
Says who? A consensus? Checkmate atheist

[Anonymous No.13479655]

>>13477810
Inuits and eskimos.

[Anonymous No.13480132]

>>13478869

I don't necessarily disagree. I think he has a specific talent as a food historian and anthropologist, and is good at getting people to look at the uglier sides of our food chain, but I also think he does some pretty classist moralising and there are a few points he makes that are blatantly anti-science.

[Anonymous No.13480191]

Mmm vegetables

[Anonymous No.13480202]

>>13479233

Even if objectivity did exist in this case, that doesn't mean we've found it. From the ecological side, factory farming is pretty fucked, so that comes down more to how much you personally care about the environment, but ethically it's murkier, because even if there *is* objective truth in what rights should be extended to animals, we don't have it. There is not a QED argument that says you shouldn't shove animals into small spaces to live in their own filth, let alone kill them to eat.

I've lived on a small farm where we've raised our own beef and chickens and grown most of our own produce. I liked the fact of having to raise a steer and having to kill it yourself if you wanted to eat it. Having a closer connection to my foods' source is more of an aesthetic decision on my part than an ethical one.

[Anonymous No.13480213]

>>13477820
>What is exhaustion/time?
Steve Albini is a musician not even a particularly successful one. He clearly doesn't have a nuanced enough perspective on the world to be living your life by his quotes. I would like the see him not partake in fastfood working 5am-9pm in a physical labor job.

[Anonymous No.13480302]

>>13479641
No it isn't. Math may only be consistent based on your axioms, and there is no pure reason to pick one set of axioms over another.

[Anonymous No.13480318]

>>13480302
Give me any possible perspective/scenario where 1+1 != 2 (in base 10).

[Anonymous No.13480374]

>>13480318
(In base 10)
There are you axioms, but to seriously answer your question, if "1" represents an identity for simple sets and the "+" represents set unions.
You literally dont know anything beyond high school maths, do you?

[Anonymous No.13480382]

>>13477810
michael pollan is another one of those pseudo intellectual libcucks that does a whole lot of talking about nothing so he can latch onto what actually becomes popular for more money

[Anonymous No.13480389]

>>13477820
That's not even true.
Unless you're talking about $1 sliced bread a nice load would cost you $3-5. Cheese is plenty expensive costing you $5+ for a tiny block or a package of slices. And roast beef sliced at the deli or prepackaged in a 6+oz amount would cost $3+.

Now I'd you bought enough bulk that you ate roast beef sandwiches all week? Maybe. But just for a quick dinner it'll cost more and take longer.

[Anonymous No.13480412]

>>13477810
"Not too much" is literally the only thing that matters

[Anonymous No.13480437]

>>13477810

[Anonymous No.13480488]

>>13478123
>>13478678
Completely 100% verifiably false. The concentrations are not insignificant at all. They range between 5mg to 20mg of BBI per gram of protein.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814608015227

What paper brought you to the conclusion that the amounts were insignificant?

[Anonymous No.13480949]

>>13480488

The amount of these compounds isn't what's important, though. It's whether or not they have a meaningful affect on nutrient uptake. I couldn't access the full article you posted but the abstract simply said they were looking for these compounds because they have cancer fighting potential.

Anyway, some of the things I saw pointed out that if there phytonutrients had a meaningful impact on nutrient uptake, we should see people who eat lots of vegetables be deficient in various nutrients, but we don't.

"Studies on vegetarians who eat diets high in plant foods containing anti-nutrients do not generally show deficiencies in iron and zinc, so the body may be adapting to the presence of anti-nutrients by increasing the absorption of these minerals in the gut."

Stevenson L, Phillips F, O’Sullivan K, Walton J. Wheat bran: its composition and benefits to health, a European perspective. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2012 Dec; 63(8): 1001–1013.

[Anonymous No.13481001]

>>13477853
what on earth do the jews have to do with this

[Anonymous No.13481009]

Note that it says mostly, not exclusively.

[Anonymous No.13481051]

>>13479233
Translation for people silly enough to read the post: I'm cringe, pedantic and annoying

[Anonymous No.13481083]

>>13481009

Indeed. I made beef stew for dinner last night - I just got the beef from a butcher that sources from farms I know. I've also made puttanesca, french toast, taboulleh and falafel, and kimchi fried rice in the last few days. Not eating meat at every meal isn't really that hard.

[Anonymous No.13481084]

>>13480382
You sound like a smart guy who knows his stuff anon.

[Anonymous No.13481121]

>>13480389
he's probably talking about that gritty dry store brand white bread and a 15 pack of kraft singles

[Anonymous No.13481139]

>>13480213
Chill out faggot

[Anonymous No.13481144]

>>13480213
More of a producer

[Anonymous No.13481150]

>>13477810
fence sitting at its finest

"not too much..."
"mostly X....."
"eat food..." (????)

what a joke

[Anonymous No.13481163]

>>13481150
His position is "it largely doesnt matter, retard," retard.

[Anonymous No.13481174]

>>13479629
xhe’s calling (You) a tranny

[Anonymous No.13481229]

>>13479641
Reason is objective, so yeah logic and math are similar sciences. my issue is that (((Michael Pollack))) is having trouble making a logical argument about how eating factory farmed animals is good. And I mean, touché, but I'm not the one writing a fucking book trying to be definitive on this shit. Pollack literally fucked you over if you were expecting answers or explanations. It's literally his stupid little food vacation with a vague suggestion at the end asking to maybe improve your standard american diet.
>>13480202
>Even if objectivity did exist in this case, that doesn't mean we've found it.
...thanks for the nothing --- I am aware that Pollack has not made an objective yes/no statement about the issue of ethics of factory farming
But this is nonetheless the same thing Pollack did. He didn't research factory farming (i.e. he didn't watch any of it himself) and then went on to compare it to the small family farm he explores in the book where he personally slits the throats of some chickens. I don't understand how it's any different, to kill an animal yourself or to pay someone to do it for you, aside from the degrees of shit that factory farmed animals (over what, 90% of us meat?) endure. But yeah just keep being psychopaths this whole thing still has many more decades to go

>13481051
>waaaahhhhh I'm being told that only objecitve things matter again, mommy hold me I want to be in my bubble where everything is as I see it and I get to be a little god, breddit philosophy waaah

[Anonymous No.13481277]

>>13481229

>he didn't research factory farming (i.e. he didn't watch any of it himself)

He went out to CAFOs for The Omnivore's Dilemma. I haven't actually read any of his other works.

> I don't understand how it's any different, to kill an animal yourself or to pay someone to do it for you, aside from the degrees of shit that factory farmed animals (over what, 90% of us meat?) endure

I think it's possible to have an ethical framework wherein raising and slaughtering animals to be consumed is fine while also recognizing that it's ethically valuable to reduce their suffering as much as possible during that time.

Besides, though, I think Pollan and his ilk have less of an ethical concern with meat eating and a more ecological one. The practices that allow beef to be so cheap cause environmental harm both in the feed lot and in the corn field that supplies them.

[Anonymous No.13481284]

>>13477820
You post this quote just to trigger me, and it works every time
Fuck you with a cactus, anon

[Anonymous No.13481432]

Foods for this feel?

[Anonymous No.13481444]

>>13481432

>Sargon of Akkad

Isn't he the guy that got btfo by Sean for being actually illiterate?

[Anonymous No.13481447]

>>13481432
thats...quite an unsexy ass

[Anonymous No.13481491]

>>13477817
Easy mate

IT'S OK
TO BE
USA

[Anonymous No.13481498]

>>13477810
nah m8 seafood is too good

[Anonymous No.13481592]

>>13480949
This website doesn't allow sci-hub links because it flags it as spam. but any article you find you can go to sci-hub dot tw and paste the url there to get the full version downloaded as a PDF. Including the link I linked above.

You have a very good point about body adaptation, and I took a moment to dig up the referenced paper. The quote in the paper you mention is actually a reference to this paper:
https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article-abstract/59/5/1223S/4732589?redirectedFrom=fulltext
which you can get the full version of if you do the sci-hub dot tw thing.

The abstract is interesting, it feels like the authors of "Wheat bran: its composition and benefits to health, a European perspective" somewhat misrepresented this paper, which is unsurprising because the paper is sponsored by the Kellogg Company.

>This review compares the content and major food sources of copper, manganese, selenium, and zinc in vegetarian and omnivorous diets. Interactions affecting trace element bioavailability and their impact on the trace element status of vegetarians are discussed. Adult vegetarian diets often have a lower zinc and selenium content but a higher copper and manganese content compared with omnivorous diets. Cereals are the primary sources of copper, manganese, and selenium in most diets and the major source of zinc in many vegetarian diets; flesh floods are the primary source of zinc and secondary source of selenium in omnivorous diets. Despite the apparent lower bioavailability of zinc, copper, manganese, and selenium in vegetarian diets because of the high contents of phytic acid and/or dietary fiber and the low content of flesh foods in the diet, the trace element status of most adult vegetarians appears to be adequate. Children, however, appear to be more vulnerable to suboptimal zinc status, presumably because of their high zinc requirements for growth and their bodies' failure to adapt to a vegetarian diet by increased absorption of dietary zinc.

[Anonymous No.13481626]

>>13481592

So, again, even vegetarians, apart from potentially in the case of children, get adequate nutrient absorption even though they eat many vegetables. I'm not even a vegetarian, I just eat meat less frequently than the average American.

Again, I haven't found any papers that signify that eating vegetables introduces enough phytonutrients to meaningfully affect nutrition, and there have been plenty that show that these same phytonutrients serve important anti-oxidant and anti-disease purposes.

[Anonymous No.13481640]

>>13477810
I can't but contrarian disease will make me attempt to

[Anonymous No.13481641]

>>13481626
I would say the children thing is pretty alarming, there are lots of children raised as vegetarian even vegan these days and it is assumed that these diets are sufficient, and not detrimental to growth.

Additionally I wonder what has been discovered since this paper was released (1994). 26 years is absolute eons in the molecular biology world. Likely there is a better explanation than "we just don't know how people are compensating". What if the compensation mechanism is in itself detrimental? For example when the body is low in calcium it starts to break down and consume bone to meet its requirements.

[Anonymous No.13481680]

>>13481641

I'm not recommending vegetarianism or veganism, though, and given that most people eat an amount of vegetables, the fact that nutrient deficiency isn't rampant seems pretty telling that these compounds do basically nothing in an omnivorous diet.

I would just like to see one study that shows an omnivore with measurable nutrient deficiency as a result of phytonutrients from plant consumption.

[Anonymous No.13481690]

>>13477810
"Sleeping next to a naked prepubescent girl that's related by blood to you while you are also naked is necessary to conserve your karmic energy."
T. Mahatma Gandhi

Prove me wrong

[Anonymous No.13481729]

>>13477810
Fuck you, birds are tasty.

[Anonymous No.13481735]

>>13481680
>I would just like to see one study that shows an omnivore with measurable nutrient deficiency as a result of phytonutrients from plant consumption.

It's gonna be a while before we see anything like that because what will you measure it against? carnivores? Thats a pretty small group of people currently, and there's basically zero research being done on them.

[Anonymous No.13481737]

>>13481729

I agree. I'm probably doing Chinese white chicken this weekend.

[Anonymous No.13481756]

>>13481735

>because what will you measure it against?

The levels of nutrients that we know are ideal for proper body function, duh. We have medical knowledge of what happens when you have too little or too much of whatever given compound in your body.

[Anonymous No.13481838]

>>13481729
that doesn't contradict the quote though?