Instigator / Pro
42
1563
rating
80
debates
56.87%
won
Topic
#5902
The Carnivore Diet Is Stupid
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 6 votes and with 37 points ahead, the winner is...
FishChaser
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Rated
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
- Minimal rating
- None
Contender / Con
5
1498
rating
34
debates
66.18%
won
Description
Don't be a monkey's ass cheek, if you try to argue that carnivore diet can't be "stupid" because diets don't have cognitive faculties you auto-lose. What I mean by "stupid" is that it's a stupid idea to adopt a carnivore diet, that it is bad for you and that arguments favoring the carnivore diet are stupid ones used by stupid people.
Round 1
1: Human metabolism doesn't match that of carnivorous animals. When you are on the carnivore diet, you derive most of your energy by burning fat and converting it into "ketones" which is called ketosis. There are virtually no animals on earth who use ketones as a primary energy source and the very few that do bare no resemblance to humans biologically. Ketosis is a back up plan, a biological fail safe to prevent you from dying when you are starving. Actual carnivorous animals convert amino acids into carbohydrates, and when humans replicate an actual carnivore's macronutrient ratios we tend to die because protein happens to be the macronutrient we are the worst at using for energy. This of course would be impossible if we were adapted to living solely off animal products, because in nature we would find that most of the caloric composition of the animals we kill would be protein, especially since wild game is a lot leaner than the livestock we have bred into existence over the years.
2: The carnivore diet destroys your microbiome. The bacteria in our digestive tract is vital for literally every aspect of our health, and without carbs or fiber in your diet the ecosystem therein would collapse and the beneficial bacteria would die. Without their much needed carbs and fiber, the bacteria would first eat the protective lining of mucus covering the inner intestinal tract, leaving you open to severe bowel inflammation and parasitic infestation, before finally dying and taking your neurochemistry and immune system with them. People on the carnivore diet claim it has done good things for their mental health among other things, but this is because they removed processed food and harmful additives from their diet or because they had food sensitivities. Given enough time things will get worse, and it will be harder and harder to reintroduce plant foods since the microbiome will be in severely bad shape. If you can't handle fiber then there is an underlying issue that must be addressed and carnivore diet is running away from the problem and making it worse rather than fixing it. Maybe if you already have severe problems with fiber or certain plant foods, it works as a VERY temporary elimination diet, but long term it will always molest you in the butt hole cheeks.
3: The "plants are toxic" argument is stupid. Yes, plants use poison to defend themselves but just as certain plant-predators develop adaptations to combat certain defense chemicals, plants also develop adaptations against certain predators. Just because broccoli has defense chemicals doesn't mean those chemicals are meant to kill us specifically, especially since we have specifically bred plants like broccoli to be more edible for thousands of years. The plants we eat are mostly trying to deter insects, not the large predators who are actively cultivating them and making sure they reproduce (humans). Broccoli has no Darwinistic selective pressure to kill humans because no matter how much broccoli we eat we will just grow more of it and evolution only cares about whether you reproduce or not.
4: It is stupid to adopt a diet which specifically excludes everything that the scientific consensus says is healthy and specifically only eat the foods it says promote disease. I'm not someone who just believes whatever I'm told, maybe the consensus is a conspiracy created by the Jews to make the public malnourished and docile or maybe it's not. I highly doubt that it is rational however to simply discount the mountains of studies which say plant foods are good for you and meat is bad for you without having a damn good basis for it. Sure there are studies that challenge the status quo, but most of them are lower on the hierarchy of empirical rigor as it pertains to the types of studies that can be conducted. When you look at the peer-reviewed meta-analyses of peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials conducted by peer-reviewed sources they mostly suggest that you are a peer-reviewed retard for only eating the literal leading cause of disease and avoiding the literal leading cause of not having disease. Think about it, heart disease is the leading cause of death in the "civilized" world and the leading cause of heart disease is literally saturated fat and LDL from animal products. So a diet based on only eating the literal primary cause of death is basically the stupidest concept ever conceived by man.
2: The carnivore diet destroys your microbiome. The bacteria in our digestive tract is vital for literally every aspect of our health, and without carbs or fiber in your diet the ecosystem therein would collapse and the beneficial bacteria would die. Without their much needed carbs and fiber, the bacteria would first eat the protective lining of mucus covering the inner intestinal tract, leaving you open to severe bowel inflammation and parasitic infestation, before finally dying and taking your neurochemistry and immune system with them. People on the carnivore diet claim it has done good things for their mental health among other things, but this is because they removed processed food and harmful additives from their diet or because they had food sensitivities. Given enough time things will get worse, and it will be harder and harder to reintroduce plant foods since the microbiome will be in severely bad shape. If you can't handle fiber then there is an underlying issue that must be addressed and carnivore diet is running away from the problem and making it worse rather than fixing it. Maybe if you already have severe problems with fiber or certain plant foods, it works as a VERY temporary elimination diet, but long term it will always molest you in the butt hole cheeks.
3: The "plants are toxic" argument is stupid. Yes, plants use poison to defend themselves but just as certain plant-predators develop adaptations to combat certain defense chemicals, plants also develop adaptations against certain predators. Just because broccoli has defense chemicals doesn't mean those chemicals are meant to kill us specifically, especially since we have specifically bred plants like broccoli to be more edible for thousands of years. The plants we eat are mostly trying to deter insects, not the large predators who are actively cultivating them and making sure they reproduce (humans). Broccoli has no Darwinistic selective pressure to kill humans because no matter how much broccoli we eat we will just grow more of it and evolution only cares about whether you reproduce or not.
4: It is stupid to adopt a diet which specifically excludes everything that the scientific consensus says is healthy and specifically only eat the foods it says promote disease. I'm not someone who just believes whatever I'm told, maybe the consensus is a conspiracy created by the Jews to make the public malnourished and docile or maybe it's not. I highly doubt that it is rational however to simply discount the mountains of studies which say plant foods are good for you and meat is bad for you without having a damn good basis for it. Sure there are studies that challenge the status quo, but most of them are lower on the hierarchy of empirical rigor as it pertains to the types of studies that can be conducted. When you look at the peer-reviewed meta-analyses of peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials conducted by peer-reviewed sources they mostly suggest that you are a peer-reviewed retard for only eating the literal leading cause of disease and avoiding the literal leading cause of not having disease. Think about it, heart disease is the leading cause of death in the "civilized" world and the leading cause of heart disease is literally saturated fat and LDL from animal products. So a diet based on only eating the literal primary cause of death is basically the stupidest concept ever conceived by man.
Forfeited
Round 2
I know it's hard to pit an argument against what's obvious
but now we started this
so lets finish it, you retarded bitch
you aren't equipped
I have many ways to get a carnist zipped
cause' I'll be glad to launch an attack if your heart didn't
your diet sucks if it has no carbs in it
your diet keeps your arteries clogged and it harms your dick
I know it's arduous to argue with my logic-bomb bombardments, bitch
when I drop em' on you like they're nuclear armaments
but now we started this
so lets finish it, you retarded bitch
you aren't equipped
I have many ways to get a carnist zipped
cause' I'll be glad to launch an attack if your heart didn't
your diet sucks if it has no carbs in it
your diet keeps your arteries clogged and it harms your dick
I know it's arduous to argue with my logic-bomb bombardments, bitch
when I drop em' on you like they're nuclear armaments
Forfeited
Round 3
If you go on carnivore diet you will literally die.
Forfeited
"How am I poorer in consumption of meat"
I already told you. Meat costs more money. So logically, you would have more money if you were vegan. Not sure how this basic math confuses you. Also, by directing production to produce meat, you are producing economically less effective product.
No, you miss my point. How am I poorer in consumption of meat when it it is no sacrifice to my pocket for its procuration? When a month is done, and my procurations, obligatory and discretionary, have not depleted my increase, but have increased above and beyond expense? That’s called continuous creation of wealth; a status enduring longer than any political, social, or economic Marxism, for that systemic mode merely spends, but knows not creation of personal wealth, and never will as long as the self denies himself the ambition, planning, and execution of that wealth, just because the mirror tells you, “You cannot.”
"Poverty, for many, is a choice"
Yes, a choice to eat meat makes everyone poorer. Not sure what is confusing you.
Then your issue is economic, not culinary, and has little to do with relative intelligence. Poverty, for many, is a choice to want wealth, and act accordingly, or not, and don’t. What’s stopping you? I’ll tell you: your mirror. That guy is your only nemesis.
Meat is very expensive. It is economically stupid to eat or produce meat. Only a person who wants to increase poverty in his country would eat meat. I eat meat too, but I understand that its completely retarded.
Absurd. We humans are, by design, having been given canine teeth, and salivary amylase, an enzyme released in the mouth and stomach to breakdown complex protein ]meat] and carbohydrates, seems we were designed to be omnivores. Natural and cultivated wetlands, streams, rivers, lakes and oceans produce more atmospheric Methane than do cows, according to a 1980s Columbia University study. Vegans, go ahead and eat your rice [I eat it, too], but. leave my filet mignon alone.
What's wylted and a pig have in common?
4feet
Anyone want to vote on this? UNFORTUNATELY Wylted couldn't defend his position but who can blame him when his side is impossible to defend.
Bro you are saying the other way around, large intestine is in herbivorous and small intestine is in carnivorous the longer one. Also omnivorous has both intestine but both are longer one.
Herbivorous has large intestine very long but small very short.
Carnivorous has small longer and large shorter.
Omnivorous has both longer.
Don't oversimplify things, our large intestine is way larger than that of an obligate carnivore and how do you know that our digestive tract hasn't changed due to cooking our food resulting in us losing certain "herbivore" traits? Also the small intestine of many herbivores is longer than the large intestine.
We have both small, intestine and large intestine, our small intestine is longer then large intestine. So we need more carnivorous diet then herbivorous diet. But if we eat only meat the our large intestine bacteria will starve. which is our almost 70% immune system. Those bacteria are vital for our health. Being omnivorous it's inivetable for us to consume both and vital.
I kindly ask you to post your arguments quickly, even at the cost of quality because that's what I will be doing as well
I also like chocolate. I couldnt go on animal products alone. I started building muscles. Muscles are made from calories, water and air, so I need to eat more calories, drink more water and breathe more air with proper breathing so that I get bigger muscles.
This debate isn't about whether meat is included in your diet in general, it's about the extreme diet called the carnivore diet where they literally don't consume any plat foods at all.
Is there more protein in meat? Yes. Is that protein more bioavailable and "complete" ? Yes. If you only want to be strong regardless of if it is more healthy, you would be better off including meat in your diet. But is it healthier to have meat in your diet or not, and how much? I honestly don't know, the more I learn about nutrition the less confident I am about making blanket statements about certain things. What I know for sure though is that the carnivore diet is one of the worst diets on earth.
I eat what I like, even if its not healthy. I want to grow big and strong, and have muscles. For that, I need calories and protein, which I would prefer not to get from walnuts but something more tasty like meat or milk.