"What the Health"

[Michael_00005]

Wow, just watched the documentary: "What the Health" on Netflix. Very well done; all the important topics covered! It's baffling to see how these topics can be ignored in society. Once you get to the part where they add "sponsor" into their Google search, everything starts to become clear.

Has anyone else watched this documentary?

You can watch the full movie for free here, at least for now. Sometimes these links are only for a limited time:
https://www.facebook.com/Expanzia/video ... =2&theater

[Stahlmann]

Care to give a short summary?

[Michael_00005]

Had only watched about 60% of the movie when posting this, but it just keeps getting better. I would have loved to have had this information growing up! It includes about everything you need to know in regards to obtaining optimal health, dispels one myth after another, and then it closes by showing how top athletes are starting to make the change for the benefits.

They did miss the withdrawal part, which is very important and something everyone making the change should be aware of, the book "The Change" or the doc "Super Juice me!" do a very good job covering this topic. Basically anyone making fast changes away from the SAD (Standard American Diet), might have withdrawals and get sick. It might last for a day in most cases, but up to a week or more in rare cases.

[Eureka]

It includes about everything you need to know in regards to obtaining optimal health

I don't have Netflix. Thus, could you elaborate a bit? I'd also like to obtain optimal health

[jennypenny]

It's basically about why you should become a vegan.

I'm starting to think Michael_00005's real last name is Greger.

[BRUTE]

from the same humans who made Cowspiracy. propaganda?

[C40]

ugh.. all the vegan promotion gets really old.

[sl-owl-orris]

Interesting film. The points shown here as well as what dr Greger talks about make sense to me. Additionally, since I introduced whole-foods plant-based diet in my life, I was able to quit taking medication within days, I lost a lot of unnecessary weight, I have more energy and just feel better in general.

Could anyone explain to me why is this propaganda, or deconstruct points made in the film one by one? I would like to know what is it that I seem to be missing in this picture.

[Michael_00005]

-Eureka - it's a whole food PBD, and the "Sponsor" part added to the Google search shows how every (~) major medical association takes large sums of money from the meat industry and thus ignores all the medical studies that now call meat a class one carcinogen. When you 1st sign up for Netflix they give you a free 30 day trial; they do have some very good documentaries.

Anyone with a little bit of will power can prove the results for themselves with a minimum of 6 weeks on the diet and a bit of honest observation. A bat might claim the sun does not exist while he hides in the dark cave with his eyes closed during the day, but this does nothing to diminish the sun's glory and brightness. The truth is there for those that want it, it's always been this way. Most don't want it, they so greatly fear the temporary discomfort of giving up their poison (food addiction) for the greater long (and even short term) benefits.

Eating meat is everyone's choice of course, just don't be surprised when you get that sharp pain in your chest shortly after the age of 50, or become obese, of get cancer, the list goes on and on. Good health is a choice.

Observation - get on a dating site and look at women over the age of 40 from a regular site, then look at the same age group from a vegetarian site. The difference in appearance says it all. In fact the difference is mind blowing, why would anyone what to do this to their body? Not only do you wreck your body on the inside but over time it becomes more and more evident on the outside.

Go visit the hospitals and see what people are eating there, find someone over the age of 40 who is thin (like a teenager) and looks healthy (if you can find one) and ask them about diet.
We can do our own research, there is no need to rely on others.

[BRUTE]

Observation - get on a dating site and look at women over the age of 40 from a regular site, then look at the same age group from a vegetarian site. The difference in appearance says it all.

almost no developed musculature, cracked skin, terrible squat due to lack of glutes, skinny fat.. (more ad hominem available upon request)

of course, the opposite can easily be demonstrated: putting fat humans on a meat-only diet very dramatically reduces their body fat and improves their lipid panel. turns out the fat-loss part of a "whole-foods, plant based diet" is simply the quality and quantity of the carb content.

brute's seen VERY few long term vegetarians or vegans that looked strong. he's not sure if veganism makes humans weak or if weak humans choose veganism, but where there's smoke, there might be fire. yea, there's a handful of examples of humans that are vegan and are strong, but they are exceptions.

[Dragline]

Go visit the hospitals and see what people are eating there, find someone over the age of 40 who is thin (like a teenager) and looks healthy (if you can find one) and ask them about diet.
We can do our own research, there is no need to rely on others.

So are you saying I can eat potato chips, french fries, twinkies and drink soda, and so long as they use vegetable oil and I don't touch meat and I'll be healthy? Or do you need to only restrict it to certain non-meat foods and add four or five other healthy practices to make it "work right", as Dr. Ornish recommends?

Here's some research. Nice lectures from scientists and doctors with no dramatic flourishes and they are free. See what you think. I found them myself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc1XsO3mxX8&t=1004s (see part at 13:00 - 18:00 in particular)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWt1HNudyKM&t=2236s (about reducing your chances of contracting cancer -- you want saturated fat like grass-fed beef, and certain special vegs that include crucifers, berries and spices; so better butter up that brussels sprout)

BTW, I'm over 50 and about the same height and weight as my 15-21 year old sons. But you won't find too many healthy people in hospitals. Healthy people don't spend a lot of time in hospitals, because hospitals are for sick people. You'll find the healthy ones out exercising -- some eating meat and some not, yet they are all generally pretty healthy.

[sl-owl-orris]

@Dragline

Thanks for an honest reply. Here's why this "new science" doesn't convince me:

https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-sa ... he-public/

https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-sa ... p-to-fail/ (please watch especially this video to see how these studies are misleading)

Here's the link to International Agency for Cancer Research classifying processed meat as class 1 carcinogen and red meat as class 2 carcinogen, this is from independent UN research by 22 experts from 10 countries after reviewing over 800 studies on effect of meat on cancer:

https://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/ ... r240_E.pdf

http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Classific ... lassif.php

[George the original one]

Here's the link to International Agency for Cancer Research classifying processed meat as class 1 carcinogen and red meat as class 2 carcinogen, this is from independent UN research by 22 experts from 10 countries after reviewing over 800 studies on effect of meat on cancer:

So that leaves non-processed meats not classified as red meat. Fish & fowl & insect & lizard.

[Dragline]

First, Nutritionfacts is Dr. Greger's propaganda machine and is not a reliable source. Its like citing Fox & Friends or Rachel Maddow. Greger suffers from the same statistical misuse and nonsense described in the videos I posted. He just cherry-picks the epidemiological studies that supports his view -- yes, I have looked into this in detail. If you look carefully at that site, you will also find (nicely buried) that even he admits that the diet he recommends is nutrient deficient and requires supplements.

And you will find that ALL processed foods are carcinogens when consumed in quantity, whether they be animal, vegetable or mineral. But do you know anyone -- anyone at all -- who contracted cancer simply from eating ordinary quantities of non-processed meat without having other bad habits or a genetic disposition (or just bad luck or other exposures)?

The WHO standards are also so low as to be nearly meaningless and include vegan delights like coffee -- but only if its "hot", backtracking on earlier statements. Yes, all "hot" beverages cause cancer according to those standards. See https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/worl ... ancer.html Coffee itself used to be bad, but now its good. The reason WHO screws up is that it puts too much stock in epidemiological studies that are not statistically significant, which practice is debunked in the videos I posted.

WHO/IARC now readily backtrack and waffle on their "conclusions", which are routinely mis-cited by the public. In fact, they admit that that their studies as to non-processed red meat is not causal, but merely associative -- meaning that other life factors could be at play. As for the central issue of the OP, WHO punts and offers no conclusion whatsoever, because it ACTUALLY DEPENDS ON OTHER LIFESTYLE FACTORS, McFLY:

"22. Should we be vegetarians?

Vegetarian diets and diets that include meat have different advantages and disadvantages for health. However, this evaluation did not directly compare health risks in vegetarians and people who eat meat. That type of comparison is difficult because these groups can be different in other ways besides their consumption of meat."

These limitations of WHO's review and others are described here: http://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red-meat/en/

In other words, what you cited from WHO has no bearing on what is at issue here -- they did not consider it.

[BRUTE]

excellent

[Lemon]

@dragline

The hot beverage thing is 'sort of' true. But the data I know of comes from the middle east and in particular Iran where hot means HOT. Near burning temperatures not being what most people drink their coffee at. I stopped drinking tea for about...2 days having read the papers.

As for the processed foods are carcinogens. Proof that just bacon caused your cancer is pretty much an impossible level of evidence because it is only going to be one of a kaleidoscope of contributory factors.
This is the problem with using population data and tailoring to an individual, these studies cannot prove causation on that sort of focus. There are probable links. In the end it tends to boil down to eating little processed food, good amount of Veg/Fruit and Exercising. Everything else is minor. Oh and not smoking and not drinking too much. Many people seem to complicate things far beyond this with superfoods etc. where you are looking at very marginal individual level gains.

[Dragline]

Agreed. Fyi, I was including all processed foods, whether they were meats or things commonly presented in boxes or bags, or generally of artificial construction, like soda and sugary cakes and white flour crackers. Anything with the fiber removed and/or chemicals or sugar added, really.

I was listening to a podcast recently (might have been Dave Asprey and Barry Sears, but I forget; could also have been a Tim Ferris guest), where they noted that the single most significant characteristic of the so-called "SAD" diet (Standard American Diet) is that it contains about 54% processed foods, largely fried and sugar-added foods.

[BRUTE]

what if brute told Dragline that high fiber is the main factor in causing constipation and colon cancer..

fiber is good in the same way filter cigarettes are good. the whole fruit/veg thing is BS.

[7Wannabe5]

I doubt the processed vs. unprocessed too. Viagra and ginseng intake are both correlated with increased need to pee at 2 in the morning.

Also, the majority of the human impact on the composition of foods we consume takes place at the level of varietal breeding and feeding or fertilization of crops and livestock destined for consumption. Angus beef and Honeycrisp apples and NK Soybeans S20-T6 did not spontaneously or independently evolve.

The most affluent humans are best able to adhere to purity rules applied to foodstuffs for the same reason they are best able to hire somebody to swab out their toilets.

[ThisDinosaur]

BRUTE,
Where did you get the idea fiber causes colon cancer?

I searched google scholar for meta analyses concerning dietary fiber and colon cancer. They all show fiber and plant foods to be protective. A minority show no effect. And some cannot separate the protective effect of vegetables from the protective effect of reduced meat consumption.