- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
You Are What You Eat (Twin Experiment) - Netflix
Posted on 1/7/24 at 10:01 pm
Posted on 1/7/24 at 10:01 pm
Great premise. Take two identical twins and put them on different diets for 8 weeks - omnivore v vegan. Test vitals, fat, etc at the end.
Unfortunately, 3/4 of the show is anti-meat, food “apartheids” (that was an actual phrase), etc.
Spartacus (NJ-D) makes appearances and NYC mayor.
I’m fast-forwarding through most of it until the results.
Unfortunately, 3/4 of the show is anti-meat, food “apartheids” (that was an actual phrase), etc.
Spartacus (NJ-D) makes appearances and NYC mayor.
I’m fast-forwarding through most of it until the results.
This post was edited on 1/7/24 at 10:02 pm
Posted on 1/7/24 at 10:08 pm to Hou_Lawyer
The anti meat bullshite made me stop watching. Lost interest.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 10:08 pm to Hou_Lawyer
It's nothing more than vegan-funded nonsense. Don't waste your time. The results are meaningless for many reasons, but here's an example: the 2 different diets were NOT controlled for calories.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 10:41 pm to Hou_Lawyer
We watched it to the end. Episode 1 set it up great. The premise was extremely intriguing. Then it all went to shite at the start of episode 2. 90% of it was just pure vegan propaganda with a snippet here and there of the twins.
Even the experiment part of it was biased and bunk from a science perspective. It was clear all of the doctors and professionals had their minds made up and well looking for their answers in the process. Just backwards as frick. The experiment was EXTREMELY uncontrolled. Even the demonstration of bacteria in the three different chicken samples was irrelevant because the "scientist" opened all three samples and handled them right next to each other. It was impossible for there to NOT be cross contamination. Then to add insult to injury their two high value commentators were incredibly liberal politicians. They even had an expert blame white flight for a lack of healthy food in cities.
fricking white people!
I was looking forward to the results after ep.1, but was incredibly disappointed.
Even the experiment part of it was biased and bunk from a science perspective. It was clear all of the doctors and professionals had their minds made up and well looking for their answers in the process. Just backwards as frick. The experiment was EXTREMELY uncontrolled. Even the demonstration of bacteria in the three different chicken samples was irrelevant because the "scientist" opened all three samples and handled them right next to each other. It was impossible for there to NOT be cross contamination. Then to add insult to injury their two high value commentators were incredibly liberal politicians. They even had an expert blame white flight for a lack of healthy food in cities.
fricking white people!
I was looking forward to the results after ep.1, but was incredibly disappointed.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 11:42 am to Hou_Lawyer
I smelled the anti-meat bend about five minutes in and stopped watching. No telling who funded this thing.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 12:41 pm to Gifman
quote:I got $20 on James Cameron
No telling who funded this thing.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 9:04 pm to Hou_Lawyer
I drank milk and ate meat right after.
I'll never go full vegan but there are some benefits to eating more plants. That said. I am not giving up dairy or beef.
I'll never go full vegan but there are some benefits to eating more plants. That said. I am not giving up dairy or beef.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 9:47 pm to Big Scrub TX
Nina Teicholz obliterated it already:
LINK
quote:
Imagine if Cargill Meats launched a center at, say, Dartmouth University, designed to “realize the positive benefits of a carnivore diet” and “identify the animal-based foods to replace plants” for the betterment of all. The initiative is led by a professor who has been a carnivore for 40-plus years and whose most recent study—showing that a carnivore diet prevented heart disease by citing highly selective cholesterol criteria—was funded by a billionaire’s philanthropy devoted entirely to carnivore-related projects. Among them was a hit Netflix film promoting a carnivore diet, to which the billionaire had donated upwards of $1 million. The Dartmouth study publication discloses its foundation grant but says nothing about the philanthropy’s carnivore bias or the fact that the entire Dartmouth center itself is a Cargill Meat venture. (The carnivore professor does, however, report receiving funds from Cargill “outside the submitted work.”)
Surely a media take-down of such industry interference in science would ensue, noting these meat-industry conflicts and the surprising failure to disclose them by the meat-funded scientists.
quote:
Because Gardner and PBDI simply assume the health benefits of plant-based eating, they are no longer engaged in the scientific question that should interest us most: whether a vegan diet can be a healthful option for human health in the long term. For PBDI, science is evidently relegated to providing a fig leaf of legitimacy for the center’s advocacy objectives.
The fact that human health is not among PBDI’s priorities should ring alarm bells throughout the world of nutrition. The field already suffers from a lack of trust, as Gardner himself pointed out, due to the influence of food and pharma funding. Now, we learn that one of its most prominent scientists has acknowledged that his research on food is principally inspired not by health concerns– hence, fulfilling his obligation as a nutritionist -- but by animal rights, the environment, and labor issues. That this left turn into advocacy has not roused the interest of the media or top public health officials is perhaps because Gardner’s beliefs are aligned with their own. Still, Gardner was right in 2020: we should be troubled by the basic integrity of nutrition science and the obvious financial conflicts of interest present here. Should Stanford support a Beyond-Meat funded advocacy center masquerading as science, and should Gardner be deciding the U.S. Dietary Guidelines for the entire nation? We think not.
LINK
Posted on 1/8/24 at 9:57 pm to Big Scrub TX
As soon as I saw this guy, I knew what was going to happen. I really wanted to watch this since I have twins. We didn’t make it through the first episode.


Posted on 1/9/24 at 7:56 am to Hou_Lawyer
quote:
Unfortunately, 3/4 of the show is anti-meat
quote:
I’m fast-forwarding through most of it until the results.
Do you really think they will report results that don't match up with their anti-meat stance?
Posted on 1/9/24 at 8:19 am to chryso
Vegan propaganda. Fully funded by them
Posted on 1/9/24 at 9:33 am to Hou_Lawyer
If humans had evolved to be strictly vegetarian we’d have massive rib cages & guts like gorillas. Because we’d need to eat huge amounts of plants to sustain ourselves.
We’re a different species thanks to our ancestors.
We’re a different species thanks to our ancestors.
Posted on 1/9/24 at 11:38 am to Hou_Lawyer
I watched the Trailer and it looked interesting until I saw this stupid comment, "Every time you eat a steak, a little puff of smoke goes up in the Amazon" 

Posted on 1/9/24 at 11:52 am to Big Scrub TX
quote:
It's nothing more than vegan-funded nonsense
There's another Netflix special called "Games Changers" I think that is the exact same playbook.
I started watching it with an open mind and a hope to learn some new nutrition advice. About halfway through their vegan speil they started playing the global warming card. That's when I realized, frick THIS shite, and turned it off.
Posted on 1/9/24 at 4:06 pm to Hou_Lawyer
BioLayne has a great take on it on his Instagram account.
Yes, the vegan group had better results. They also consumed more fiber, less saturated fat, and on average 200 less calories than the other group. Those facts more than account for the positive changes in their biomarkers.
Is it possible that going vegan makes it easier to accomplish those goals? Maybe. I personally don't think so. But for some people, it might.
Still, with good dietary choices, meat eaters can have just as much of a healthy profile as vegans.
What I did not hear BioLayne discuss:
Does the documentary also account for the fact that veganism literally cannot provide all of the nutrients humans require without supplementation? And does it account for the fact that most people cannot afford nor have the accountability or education level to understand how to supplement their vegan diet with all of the nutrients they need?
Yes, the vegan group had better results. They also consumed more fiber, less saturated fat, and on average 200 less calories than the other group. Those facts more than account for the positive changes in their biomarkers.
Is it possible that going vegan makes it easier to accomplish those goals? Maybe. I personally don't think so. But for some people, it might.
Still, with good dietary choices, meat eaters can have just as much of a healthy profile as vegans.
What I did not hear BioLayne discuss:
Does the documentary also account for the fact that veganism literally cannot provide all of the nutrients humans require without supplementation? And does it account for the fact that most people cannot afford nor have the accountability or education level to understand how to supplement their vegan diet with all of the nutrients they need?
Posted on 1/9/24 at 4:07 pm to Napoleon
quote:
I drank milk and ate meat right after.

Errday
Popular
Back to top
