The big take away is when Dave says he's sitting down to take a break and watch a movie, he means this^. Dave, there's plenty of comedies on there too!
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
Baboumian was comedy enough. And then there were the ring tests..
@urabagofcells2228
Жыл бұрын
😅
@chrissmithdoe2100
4 жыл бұрын
one of the best parts of this great video was hearing Dave's pleasant scottish accent pronounce 'nineteen ninety nine'
@tommygunz5356
3 жыл бұрын
I could care less
@AMM1998
3 жыл бұрын
@@tommygunz5356 you mean to say that you COULDN'T care less. If you COULD care less, that means you care somewhat. Next time you try to leave a snarky comment you should probably make sure you don't make any errors in your comment
@Naturalmedicineprescription
2 ай бұрын
@@AMM1998 Circling Grammar nazi stork waiting to pounce.. alert !! nabb them YT trolls serr (comma after comment, you should probably ensure you don't use make make)
@iankatz108
4 жыл бұрын
The big issue is the cost to the environment and the cruelty practiced, when you make it about yourself, you really miss the point. We can be just as strong if not stronger without supporting the destructive forces of factory farming.
@Josh-wb7ii
4 жыл бұрын
preach brother
@kriszteblade
4 жыл бұрын
Yeah, "me, me, me, me". I feel good eating a lot of meat, so I don't care about the environmental costs. Its high time climbers take responsibility. I hope flying to 30 bouldering places all over the world every year will also one day become a thing of the past.
@callumscott5107
4 жыл бұрын
@@kriszteblade Suppose I went to the gym, but the only reason I enjoyed going to the gym was to espouse how disciplined and hard working I was to others. Suppose I endured all of that suffering in order to feel that sense of superiority. Would my behaviour genuinely motivate others to go? Instagram posts filled with me shaming others for being so unhealthy and undisciplined. Am I a force for good in the world? It's really quite questionable. On the one hand I'd likely be making people want to exercise, but not out of a want for their own health, not out of love for their own life and fitness, but instead because of a sense of shame that I'm shoving down their throats, making them feel insecure. I'm guilting people into doing something that I consider to be for their own good, but couldn't I just accomplish the same goal with a positive spin instead? 'If you don't care about your fitness, or are unable to care about it, then that's OK, it's your choice, but know that there are genuinely plenty of positives to it that you're missing out on. I understand it's hard to get used to, but it really does feel good to know you're doing something positive'. Isn't that a more encouraging, convincing, and less abrasive approach? I say this because people generally don't like doing things which they themselves don't desire. If your approach to recruit new vegans is to shame them and talk about how virtuous you are, don't be surprised when decent people are reluctant to submit and join you. If your approach is instead to be a decent and empathetic human being who wants the best for others, and is tolerant of different opinions rather than cramming your own down their throat, you might be surprised to find that people are far more open to following suit. By all means though, continue telling other people how selfish they are and how selfless you are if you want to. I'm sure you're in a similar position to professional climbers and refrain from flying around the world purely for ethical reasons, and definitely not any other reasons.
@HelmetBlissta
4 жыл бұрын
Callum Scott excellent comment,
@choanlpoto
4 жыл бұрын
You can eat meat and animals while being environmental friendly and respect the life of the animal. You can eat vegan and still have a huge impact on the environment : soy plantation, advocat, banana,etc... all this shit crossing ten time the world before ending on your vegan plate.
@anosnd
4 жыл бұрын
My partner who is a nutritionist and former vegan for 12 years mirrored every single major point that Dave brought up. I very much appreciate how well informed and diligent Dave is in all his research. This is a shining example of why I follow his content and will continue to for years to come. Thanks for your work, Dave!
@lucassgpina
4 жыл бұрын
I'm don't consume animal products for 13 years now and to be honest I think the health arguments is quite weak, so I won't bother. I do it mainly over the ethical perspective, but the environment argument is quite strong. As a Brazilian I can't agree with your point about the availability of land suitable for planting. We are one of the largest meat producers of animal protein ( considering chicken, cow and pigs) and the majority of the lands used for those are suitable for other kinds of farms. Besides that our soil production is again for stock feeding, and we do have far more cows than people in our country. Shifting the focus from meat consumption would reduce the farming impact in our environment. The ethical thinking process is quite simple, is including animal intake is the only alternative for a healthy lifestyle? Can I minimize the suffering of other without creating harm to my self? The answer is very clear for me after so many years without meat, but that's a personal experience and I know that that won't translate for everyone.
@eddyertang
4 жыл бұрын
He does cover this in the documentary. Just because you aren't putting the dead animals in your mouth, doesn't mean you aren't creating equal levels of suffering to other habitats in the wild. We empathize more with larger animals. Mainly due to the ability to connect with their eyes (and other factors). Realistically, eating bugs for example would be far far worse than eating cows. It would take thousands of bugs to sustain a few people for a week. It would only take one cow. I use bugs as an example because its a species that even most vegans don't care about. My vegan friends exterminate cockroaches for example. If every life counts, then it would seem that harvesting plants would be the greater cause of death and suffering to wild life. Ironically the only way to reduce the suffering humans cause on the planet is by reducing the number of humans... Seeing as most people brand Hitler as the most evil man to have ever lived, it might not be perceived as ethical. Unfortunately suffering is unavoidable, this is the point Dave makes about the eco system. Life balances itself out. Each animal prioritizes itself and the ecosystem accounts for that. We as humans have actually broken the system. I would think the world would be a better place with elss humans. But im also not willing to kill any, so in my opinion you shouldn't battle in a fight you simple cannot win. Just be healthy and make choices for yourself, try not to judge others too much, and remember that the best marketing strategy is one that convinces you that what you are doing now is wrong.
@eddyertang
4 жыл бұрын
@@coachalex4995 I don't mind being wrong. However simply saying it with no retort proves nothing to anyone...Enlighten me! To clarify, my comment is specifically referring to animal cruelty. I know cows are bad for the environment (if that's your point).
@gregbrowning5437
4 жыл бұрын
@@eddyertang Hey eddyertang, Firstly, the fact that you know vegans who kill cockroaches doesn't prove anything. It certainly doesn't mean that "most vegans don't care about [bugs]". I, myself, am a vegan and have killed the odd cockroach. It's a very subjective thing, but I believe it comes down to necessity through fear. I personally am afraid of them, and certainly wouldn't want them in my bedroom/kitchen cupboards. I definitely don't kill them because of the sensory pleasure (visual/sound/taste) that I can get from them. Secondly, "If every life counts, then it would seem that harvesting plants would be the greater cause of death and suffering to wildlife. ". You are aware that plants and animals are very very different? Specifically that plants don't feel pain? And also that so many more plants are fed to animals to fatten them up to produce a smaller amount of food? It's estimated that a huge portion of the world's surface could be freed up if we stopped farming animals. Thirdly, what are you doing bringing Hitler into this? Is that supposed to be funny? I don't believe he was doing what he did from some kind of ethical food production standpoint. Really?? That's weak, and potentially insulting to many. And finally suffering is not unavoidable. Unnecessary suffering is completely avoidable. If you don't need it to live, then it is unnecessary and you do it for pleasure. Can you really say, in the face of all the research, that a healthy vegan lifestyle is not possible? And if you accept that it is possible, then all the animal products you consume are for your pleasure and the animals' pain. Let's not forget that veganism is not about us eliminating animal death, it is about minimising our part in their suffering as much as possible. I hope these arguments were clear enough. Cheers, Greg
@eddyertang
4 жыл бұрын
@@gregbrowning5437 About your first point: I think subjectifying the purpose for killing living creatures is very gray territory to base your argument upon. Many would argue that killing a bug through your own (irrational) fear is far worse than eating animals for your own health. You also used the word "necessity", you use this subjectively to justify your actions. You compare it to pleasure. The pleasure in the removal of hunger is not so different from the pleasure you receive by removing your fear. Regardless of which is worse, it would be extremely difficult to convince someone (using your argument) that your actions are acceptable and those you appose are not. Second: I think you didnt watch the video or wernt paying attention, maybe also to my comment. We are not discussing the value of plant life (which should not simply be overlooked). We are discussing the billions of living animal ecosystems that a killed and completely eradicated through farming. This happens to bugs, rodents and small mammals directly, but many more species indirectly by destroying their homes and food sources. Providing a much slower more painful death. This is why i said "Just because you aren't putting the dead animals in your mouth, doesn't mean you aren't creating equal levels of suffering to other habitats in the wild"... This is the unseen torture you are causing by eating plants, and you have distanced yourself from it by not seeing it, and not putting the carcass of the dead animals in your mouth. Im not judging or saying you are bad for avoiding meat, i think its a really respectable thing to do, but im just talking about the facts of the situation. Thirdly: No, no intention to be funny in my comment. Simply stating that the only way to eradicate the negative human impact of humans is by reducing the numbers. Eating meat, or plant based diets (as demonstrated above) causes immeasurable suffering to the animals plants and environment around us. There is no way to prevent this currently. Maybe science will resolve it with printing food and new food production technologies. But likely they will come at their own price. 100% right now you simply cannot avoid contributing to suffering if you wish to stay alive. Thats' just a fact. The point i was making that unless you are willing to commit some mass exodus of humans (the most destructive species to the planet) then you will never solve your ethical dilemma. Therefore i pointed to Hitler as an example of what people think of those who try and interfere with human life on a drastic scale. Finally: "Unnecessary suffering is completely avoidable. If you don't need it to live, then it is unnecessary and you do it for pleasure." Completely untrue and again missing the point. Certainly not done for pleasure. Simple survival dictates the requirement for something else to suffer, and the amount of suffering you (and everyone else) has caused to defenseless creatures is simply immeasurable. May it be directly or indirectly. I'm sorry to be the one to break that to you. Do you watch TV? that requires power, that requires oil. Do you know what adding to oil demand causes and contributes to? War, oil leaks, oil rigs in the sea killing wildlife, high risk jobs with high mortality rates, disease. This is just one minute example. I wish your argument had even one piece of relevant or true information but its just a very basic and uninformed mindset. I don't expect you to now agree with mine, but denial is a state you should live within for as short a duration as possible. At least if your going to start debating about it. Cheers Ed
@leoingson
4 жыл бұрын
@@eddyertang Thanks Eddy for your clear unhindered (by emotions) thoughts. Not breeding (too much) is the challenge. Hard to put upon others. China has produced generation(s) of little princes that way. Rational decissions make us superior, but emotional ones prevent us from protecting ourselfs.
@GrantH2606
2 ай бұрын
I feel blessed to live in a society that provides such a large variety of food that I don't have to pay for animals to be slaughtered for my benefit. I never looked for excuses to continue paying for the ongoing slaughter of those animals, but instead looked for excuses to stop. 10 years vegan and I wish I had done it sooner.
@agh0x01
4 жыл бұрын
I agree with a lot of @Dave MacLeod's criticism of the health-related claims and the biased narrative presented in the film; the film's message is that a plant-based diet is superior to a diet containing animal products, which I don't believe is true. I think a well-planned vegan diet can be the equal of an omnivorous diet for some athletic endeavours, or at least not be the limiting factor in an athlete's performance - possibly entailing more effort for the vegan though. Dave's comments imply that what is optimal is a requirement in several parts of this video, such as the areas dealing with biological value of protein consumed, and the necessity of combining amino acids in the optimal ratios in the same meal (with the implication it may be impossible on a vegan diet, not merely more difficult). I guess from the point of view of elite athletes it's preferable for everything to be as good as it can be, but once an athlete's diet is not the limiting factor in their performance this emphasis is redundant and misplaced. I grant this certainly goes against the notion presented in the film that a vegan diet is eminently superior, which is what Dave is (rightly) challenging. Also, I thought that it was widely agreed that the need for protein combining was a myth - or is Dave again talking about what is optimal? Are there studies that indicate protein combining is necessary? Even just for elite-level athletic performance? On the subject of land use, at around 40:16 Dave talks about the land use of animal vs. plant agriculture, where the former consumes around 80% of agricultural land yet produces only 18% of calories (albeit a higher ratio of highly bioavailable protein). Dave's comments "...that's because large areas of the land surface of the world are unsuitable for crop production... it could not be swapped over" could be misleading in that they might leave the viewer with the impression that *none* of the animal agriculture land could be used to grow plants. In practice, a lot of land that doesn't currently grow plants for human consumption could be modified to do so (e.g. swales, terracing, other ideas from permaculture), or different crops more suited to the local environment could be selected. Dave's assertion that a plant-based diet is not "sustainable" without "supplement[ing] the hell out out of their diet" is subjective and not borne out by my own experience (after 18 years vegan); supplementation of several nutrients (vitamin B12, vitamin D, etc) is recommended for all plant-based diets, but that does not mean that a plant-based diet with only minimal supplementation is "unsustainable". This is yet another false dichotomy Dave seems to be presenting, albeit possibly unwittingly.
@DaxPlusPlus
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the breakdown - very much appreciate the time and effort you put in to create this.
@mjasper95
4 жыл бұрын
Hey Dave, I am a vegeterian and would like to transition towards a vegan diet step by step. I really cannot stand the junk science demonstrated in the documentary and have always been skeptical of the supposed health benefits of a vegetarian or vegan diet; i am a vegetarian for other reasons. My question the following: You talked in the video at length about the fallacy of comparing the western diet to a well-rounded vegan diet. But what do you personally think about the difference between a well-rounded omnivorous diet to a well-rounded vegan diet, especially in the context of climbing? You talked about bioavailability of protein, how big of a factor is this in your opinion? Will a difference between the diets be noticable for average, or even expert climbers or only for the very best? Do you think a vegan diet will hold an average climber back even when protein demands are met? Thanks for the great video and for dealing with junk science so the rest of us don't have to. PS i hope my english is not too bad, i am not a native speaker.
@greengraycolor
4 жыл бұрын
Why would you ask a climber about diet? Would you ask dietitian/diet expert who climbs for tips on climbing? I recommend nutritionfacts.org as a first step in getting science based diet information.
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
Good questions. Yes I think even when the vegan diet is carefully planned, it is unrealistic to expect optimal function, because the list of supplements would be so long and difficult to get right (B12, B6, retinol, vitamin A, DHA, EPA, zinc, iodine, choline, carnitine, creatine, methionine, glycine and others). A nice analogy for the vegan diet is flying a plane very low. If you get every meal just right and take every supplement, you can just stay above problems, but there is not much 'room' for error or poor choices along the way. Yes the difference of improving the diet will definitely be noticeable for climbers at all levels. Connective tissue injuries, fatigue, anabolic resistance, poor mental health and other preventable conditions are very common and improving diet quality can make an impact on all of them. It would not be my choice to supplement with refined protein powders to offset the poor protein quality because refining of this nature is environmentally wasteful and it is much more environmentally responsible to just eat high quality properly farmed food.
@greengraycolor
4 жыл бұрын
@@climbermacleod This is simply not true. B12 is the only supplement necessary. Please look it up. E.g. WHO. Choline is plants. Please look it up, e.g. nih.gov. Also excess choline is associated with prostate cancer.
@greengraycolor
4 жыл бұрын
@@Halorocker101 Trust is a personal decision. I would argue though that blogging and studying an msc does not make one an expert in a field. I teach msc students so I have some insight into this. Regarding Gregors bias, well, Dave is not a vegan, is he by default biased? If Gregor started eating meat, would you believe him more? Gregor lives from digesting literature and drawing conclusions not from selling soya.
@greengraycolor
4 жыл бұрын
@@Halorocker101 Great conclusion. Take care!
@dunklaw
4 жыл бұрын
The agriculture you are referring to @ 37:26 already exists as feed for the animal industry.
@devonrd
4 жыл бұрын
You really missed the mark at 39:00 there dave... We have billions of animals of livestock that all need to be fed in order to grow to the sizes that we like them in. This costs us humongous amounts of land in comparison to the land that would suffice to plant crops that would directly be used to feed us. Going up trophic levels (i.e breeding livestock) uses and wastes tons amount of space and energy and hurts ecosystems more than not having to feed that livestock.
@natalyag4295
4 жыл бұрын
You are not refuting his point. He cited (1) arguing that livestock can be raised in areas unsuitable for crop production, and additionally that existing predictions of crop usage for omnivorous vs. vegan diets did not use an optimized vegan diet and thus underestimated the necessary amount of crops for vegans. Unless you can provide some contradictory research or a different reinterpretation of the literature your comment is at the moment is just restating the point that he disagreed with in the video! (1) journals.lww.com/nutritiontodayonline/Fulltext/2018/07000/ Assessing_the_Role_of_Cattle_in_Sustainable_Food.5.aspx#pdf-link Layman, D. K. 2018. Assessing the Role of Cattle in Sustainable Food Systems. 53, 160-165
@andrewgarrigle9313
4 жыл бұрын
I must admit i watched this documentary and immediately got sucked in, not knowing anything much about nutrition and with the way its presented i thought it was a definite thing. I can always rely on Dave Macleod to cut through the shit and give everyone an honest unbiased answer. Thanks as always (:
@yushy5816
4 жыл бұрын
great seeing you discuss this. fantastic video as always.
@SnowBatman
Жыл бұрын
The irony here Dave is that you are the real “game changer”!
@JOPEYDOPE
4 жыл бұрын
More or less my thoughts on the film, good to hear it from someone who knows what they’re talking about. I’m going to stay vegan though purely because it helps keep me on a higher quality of diet
@derekxiaoEvanescentBliss
4 жыл бұрын
Extra work to go onto a diet that produces almost 100x more carbon
@Doors_of_janua
4 жыл бұрын
You miss soooo many nutrients on a vegan diet. So ‘quality’ of diet is just an ‘idea’ .... you need vit B’s K2 D and so on. You can not get them in a Vegan diet!
@noahl7510
4 жыл бұрын
@@Doors_of_janua looks like you got your nutrition information off of instagram and some anti vegan weightlifter bros. Stop cherry picking information to reassure yourself. Of course there are poor examples of vegan diets but... dont knock it till you've tried it, or at least done some actual research.
@noahl7510
4 жыл бұрын
@William Boyle you're trippin william. you say "whatever nonsense you eat as a vegan." then "i tried eating vegan food" obviously salad isnt enough calories to fulfill you and you had/have no idea what you're doing. if salad is the only thing you can think of when listing vegan options then you have no place in a nutritional debate😂. stick to your meat and your biased charts you see on instagram.
@noahl7510
4 жыл бұрын
@William Boyle Fair enough, to each their own! Ignorance is bliss. However you wanna justify keeping your eyes and ears closed is fine.
@willemvanriet7160
3 ай бұрын
You can't even call this a documentary. If they put this on You Tube the comments section would eat it alive! Real experts would debunk everything. Why You Tube is better than streaming for getting life changing, cutting edge, "game changing" information!
@nutzerbezeichnung
4 жыл бұрын
Valid critique of a bad documentary. As a long-term vegan, these kinds of documentaries and arguments are infuriating because they are on one hand easily disproven, reinforcing the opinions of people who want to keep eating meat and on the other hand create misinformed vegans that will have unsustainable diets, reinforcing the opinions of people who want to keep eating meat. However, I think you're falling short when you neglect to mention that the scientific consensus is that a well planned vegan diet is healthy and sustainable. Also, your argument about how that guy protecting rhinos is ridiculous because he went vegan is pretty bogus. I doubt that he was a necessary predator for that ecosystem to function. Nor are almost any humans these days, including you. You actually present an argument against it yourself, showing how early humans hunted almost all megafauna to extinction. And if you want to save the environment by making milk and meat production more efficient, this will come at the price of any ethics left in those industries. The industrialization of animal agriculture is one of the cruelest inventions of modernity and I think it's callous to advocate for it based on better sports performance.
@greengraycolor
4 жыл бұрын
How sure are you such docs so bad for veganizm? I got approached by several people to share experience of being vegan after they watched this movie. I think it is very difficult to get the message across. Too simple, not true enough. Too true, not catchy enough...
@nutzerbezeichnung
4 жыл бұрын
@@greengraycolor Admittedly, I have no hard proof of this being a net negative for veganism. But I think the fact-based criticism in this video shows how easy it is to make this documentary look bad and reinforce stereotypes about deluded vegans with an agenda. And some of the clips of ex-vegans shown here are a good example. Too often, vegan KZitemrs promote false promises and incomplete diets and then return to meat after a couple of years in bad health. In my mind, that is worse for veganism than these people never going vegan in the first place. A healthy vegan diet still requires good information and some effort in this day and age and pretending it doesn't isn't helping anyone. The best thing you can do is being a healthy, well informed vegan, helping people out with good information when they try to go vegan.
@nutzerbezeichnung
4 жыл бұрын
@@greengraycolor Plus, I think that it's wrong to promote a cause with lies or half truths, even if it's a good cause.
@greengraycolor
4 жыл бұрын
@@nutzerbezeichnung I have only seen reviews of this documentary but so far I haven't heart a valid claim it lies. Half truths, well, as a scientist I would never hope for more. Every study, every literature stream is never a complete picture. I cringe here because Dave makes wild claims, imprecise arguments sprinkled with a lot of terms which make people think he is an expert. I think it's easy to make any claim look ridicules if the topic is not trivial relative to the level of knowledge of the audience.
@nutzerbezeichnung
4 жыл бұрын
@@greengraycolor Lies of omission and blatant misrepresentation of cited studies. I think that's enough to discredit this documentary.
@chazott
4 жыл бұрын
Dave, any comment on the Adam Ondra diet as the dominant athlete in our sport? While I don't know the specifics, he seems to eat extremely healthy whole foods and mostly plant based, with an emphasis on spices to improve digestion. As the evidence suggests, he is a pretty good rock climber ;) Also Jonathan Siegrist and Alex Honnold are long-time (mostly) vegetarians with good results.
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
I don't know what Adam Ondra or the others eat either. The details matter! So no I can't comment and wouldn't even if I did know. What they eat is up to them. One thing I would say though, is to be pretty wary of attributing cause and effect to any one thing with respect to training/diet etc and a single athlete. There is variation in tolerance for 'good' and 'bad' diets in any population and if you take a cohort of athletes eating a sub optimal diet, you'll still get a few great athletes who are self selected as the ones who can tolerate the sub optimal diet or training.
@FerAdventures
4 жыл бұрын
We do actually know the specifics: "Diet is important. I don’t feel like my diet is very special, but I suppose some people would think that it is. The most important thing is how I eat during the time when I’m training hard. Right now I’m climbing outdoors, and in comparison I don’t climb as much. So diet is still important, but less so. I try to eat as much natural food as possible. For breakfast I have porridge or a smoothie. Throughout the day I eat only fruit, nuts, and seeds, as well as some vegetables and good spices like turmeric, curry, and cumin mixed with rice, buckwheat, or millet. In the evening I have some protein. It can be meat, eggs, lentils, or legumes. I don’t eat that much meat. I find that if I eat too much meat I’m not as strong. But at the same time if I go two weeks without any meat-I also feel weak. So I eat meat once or twice a week." www.climbing.com/people/adam-ondra-the-future-of-climbing/
@Mylada
4 жыл бұрын
Honestly, I think excluding or including single food product is not going to make or break your diet. You can remove fruits, berries, nuts, seeds, beans, lentils as well as meat from your diet and be just fine. Those are only secondary after more general principles.
@cityless7798
4 жыл бұрын
A 47 minute long video? You're spoiling us, Dave
@DuncanAtkinson
4 ай бұрын
Have you not watched the one on the keto diet?
@sjclark76
4 жыл бұрын
I really enjoyed the format of this video. Cheers Dave.
@emurray100
4 жыл бұрын
It's quite funny how defensive the Vegan's get. Great video Dave! Thanks!! Eat what you want folks - whatever makes you feel better both physically and mentally, just be honest with yourself.
@lewistaylor2858
4 жыл бұрын
@Abel Abel what of all the insects killed for growing single crops? or do they not count as animals?
@semiferalaquarian
2 ай бұрын
Exactly! Everyone has different health issues which require a different approach to diet
@Stoitism
4 жыл бұрын
I began eating red meat again after 16 years recently. 5 of those years were Vegetarian, 5 were Pescatarian (with no dairy) and 6 of them were Vegan. My health and vitality was failing. I was keeping up to date with the latest (biased plant-based) science. I was tracking my nutrients. I was taking all the right supplements. I was getting good sleep. Still my health declined. I took a long hard look at human biological needs, bioavailablity of nutrients in food, anti-nutrients in plants and the role of consuming animal proteins and fats in regards to human evolution. Eventually all of my research and the barrages of tests through my doctor lead me back to eating meat. And I have to say that the difference is night and day. I'm getting leaner and stronger. I have more mental clarity and focus than I have had in years. I dont think my digestion has ever been this good. My general mood has been massively uplifted. I'm eating far less food volume yet i'm getting more nutritional value with just 2 meals a day and i'm creating less waste in regards to food packaging and the like. My diet is verging on keto now and is high in animal products (meat, fish, eggs). I'm very low carb, almost zero sugar and high fat / high protein. I'm not quite in ketosis but I could get there by eliminating a further 20g of daily carbs from my diet. My Veganism was based in ethics. And for a time I was happy to deal with any health consequences as a result of my decision to stop eating animal products. That was until my health really began to decline. Ultimately my takeaway has been that human ethics and human biological needs are not entirely complimentary and that human dietary requirements are not so black and white. I think some people can do really well on a plant-based diet, but most will suffer negatively from it if it's done long-term. There are many essential nutrients we require that are just not found at all or in bio-available amounts, in plants alone. Here is another couple of rebuttals of this documentary - www.biolayne.com/articles/research/the-game-changers-review-a-scientific-analysis/ tacticmethod.com/the-game-changers-scientific-review-and-references/?fbclid=IwAR3POOLdLm6GmPEifnG70S24eTjZmr3udBBsvVkaUxAOtNi96y0Kz2F5nZ8 kzitem.info/news/bejne/0YCsqamOfpyCmHY
@pozzarefds
4 жыл бұрын
I recommend you watch Earthlings Land of Hope and Glory and see what you're eating and likely unaware that you're being complicit in.
@IsaacSMILE
4 жыл бұрын
I did this recently and pretty much immediately stopped eating animal products.
@pozzarefds
4 жыл бұрын
@@IsaacSMILE has the same impact on me. running had already got me eating quite clean, so was already pondering the change, but just never got round to it. I watched Land of Hope and Glory and just knew I would never eat meat / dairy again. My taste buds are not worth others suffering in such sick circumstances, especially as their are so many delicious vegan foods around now.
@910suck
4 жыл бұрын
Brainwashed
@910suck
4 жыл бұрын
Luke Hinds him
@910suck
4 жыл бұрын
Both of them actually
@Gabrielowns321
4 жыл бұрын
This video bashes the documentary which is fair enough since it is sensationalising the plant-based diet, yet you respond with almost equal bias. Skiving over the fact that many meats are carcinogenic, contain antibiotics, huge amounts of inflammatory compounds and raise blood serum cholesterol, to name a few. Not to mention the enormous amounts of land, water and fossil fuels consumed in the animal-agriculture industry. Also, you mention that predators are here for a reason yet it's interesting that where livestock roam, apex predators are culled to prevent them from eating said livestock...and zooming out on a global scale, the amount of ecosystems collapsing due to climate change (largely in part driven by animal ag) is shocking.
@FeeblePenguin
Жыл бұрын
Can you point to some research on this?
@renatoornelas1998
3 жыл бұрын
This has been an eye openner and one of the best explanation that I have heard in a while, for nutrition and the whole dieting and baance diet and Dave really put a point on that theme and I am very happy bout that. Thanks or everything. Excelent video and all the good things in life for you. From Portugal.
@jeffmcdonald101
3 ай бұрын
Dave: Barely contained rage. "That's just wrong, this is rubbish...how much of this documentary is left" Sorry you had to sit through this horrible "documentary" Dave...but we appreciate your unbiased and honest debunking of this utter garbage.
@petermenzies1029
3 жыл бұрын
Dave, you are a boon to climbers everywhere. Thank you for the well-researched information you present in an accessible manner, and for encouraging us all to think for ourselves.
@user-dg9ti5gq4e
4 жыл бұрын
Would be interesting to see a debate with yourself and someone advocating for a vegan diet who also has a similar background. I can admit I don't have the skills to really understand most research papers and whether or not the conclusions derived from them are actually valid. Its easy to watch this netflix documentary and believe that particular viewpoint, its also easy to watch your youtube video and believe a particular view point as well, as both seem just as plausbile having no background understanding on any of this, but having two exducated people debate about it is way more illuminating. I'm still watching your vid though so might edit this later. 28:50 - You didn't address the stomach point, not sure if that was an editing mistake.
@yingeezy
4 жыл бұрын
While admittedly my background is by no means nutritional science, your comment underscores why building a strong background understanding is important to form a critical viewpoint on deep subjects such as these. I'm not sure if a debate format would ultimately be the most desirable--often times they only reveal who has better debating skills. I suppose those who are truly invested in this topic must go through the process themselves (as David does in the video) and rigorously evaluate the scientific literature and reviews...
@suezix8689
4 жыл бұрын
Why does everybody say 'thanks for giving your opinion'? He is not. He is looking at the science (often refers to in it) to understand if the claims in the documentary are sound. So SCIENCE is giving an opinion, and on the main it's a damning one for the documentary. Game changers is Hollywood tackling a difficult, delicate subject with a lot more nuances than the promoters of the video have money (or intellectual honesty, but was a given).
@haykkhulyan6201
4 жыл бұрын
I would not recommend watching debates to form opinions about topics. Often the one who seems to be "winning" is really just shouting louder than their opponent, which says nothing of the validity of their claim.
@jrblackify
4 жыл бұрын
I would be interesting to talk with Honnold, who is currently on a rage about veganism. Maybe call him up Dave?
@chillpurr275
4 жыл бұрын
Are you referring to Honnold's mini-rant about overeager vegans? I think you missed the point or forgot the '/s' ;) instagram.com/p/B_fVa5qFDBw/ "alexhonnold: Rant of the day: diet. For some reason there are tons of folks who get mortally offended every time I post about how vegetarianism or veganism are better for the planet. And yet it’s a fact that eating less meat and dairy is the simplest way for the average individual to lower their impact. There are countless reputable sources on this subject, though it’s maybe easier to just watch a few films like @gamechangersmovie or @cowspiracy (both of which I had slight issues with, but the overall arguments are sound). The most vocal critics of my diet posts fall into a few categories: 1) People who don’t want to think about it one way or another, they just want to eat how they’ve always eaten. In some ways this category annoys me the most - it’s intellectual laziness. I grew up eating steak and drinking milk; my family was as middle class American as it gets. And then I read a ton of books and started worrying more about performance and my carbon footprint. So I stopped eating meat (or at least seriously limited it). We have to change as we learn new things. 2) Folks who argue that meat can be sustainably raised (or they hunt their own food). I agree that in some cases this can be “sustainable”, but there’s no version of sustainable meat that feeds 7.8 billion people. We have to start by just eating less meat. 3) People (almost always overly macho young men) who think that I must be seriously light duty to eat mostly plants. I don’t even know what to say to them, but I’ll just leave then with this @jimmychin pic of me soloing the Excellent Adventure, 5.13a (7c+). I think the plants did me well that day, as they have for the last 7 years or so. For anyone interested, read Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer. It had a big impact on me. Oh, and my last mini rant is reserved for vegans who are all up on their high horse and poo poo other folks’ good efforts - it’s better for someone to eat meat once a week than to eat it every day. It shouldn’t be a test of ideological purity. Diet is a spectrum and it’s better to do less harm than more."
@chadhalstead
4 жыл бұрын
Hi Dave, I understand your disappointment with many of the modern documentaries on nutrition. I believe this this film is made by and made for the western citizen and in order to be attractive, we must add a bit of shock value or exaggeration. I feel this is a response to the so-called "bro science" that I have personally heard for 20 years, when people ask me " but where do you get your protein bro?!" Decades ago, we would laugh at the thought of a vegan professional athlete, but today we have scientific data which shows how it is possible. We are slowly re-writing sports nutrition. Low quality to high quality* I've been a follower of you for over a decade and always enjoy your more lengthy and intellectual responses about the biological response to certain foods but felt you couldn't help but throw a little dirt on various characters of the film. In any debate, we know this doesn't actually support your argument. I noticed a number of emotional responses; scoffs about private jets or how the film withheld hypocritical information such as athletes getting injured. Your delivery implied their injuries were caused by a vegan diet and not the fact that anybody attempting to lift 180kg with one arm, MIGHT run risk of injuring themselves; no matter what they eat. These people make a living off of pushing their bodies to 100%.The simple principle of injury does not mean a lack of nutrition. To conclude your video with a number of youtube clips of people explaining why they stopped being vegan does nothing. I felt this was an unnecessary addition which did not help your case. As a viewer, I ask " who the hell is Bonny Rebecca, Alyse Parker, Yovana Mendoza? internet celebrities? does their popularity increase validity or relevance? they make a living off of youtube/instagram influencing? " DAVE, DAVE, DAVE, COME ON! This kid in his parents grungy basement?! Is that a future wideboyz pain cave? Vegetables caused him to injure himself? Wait, Omnivorous athletes don't get injured? Correct me if I am wrong, but I feel that is also distorting a message to support ones agenda. All in all; I enjoyed the response. I've looked into a number of references you listed to help increase my personal knowledge and look forward to hearing more from you on this issue, but if I can just say one thing ; Leave out the empty material and emotional responses. You're a brilliant dude with a ton of knowledge to share with this community. Cheers.
@rjmclean1979
2 ай бұрын
Im not a climber (more a hill runner) but i've been absorbing all of your nutrition videos. I like your honest, unbiased analysis. Thanks for taking the time to create these videos. Also love that you are also from Glasgow 👍
@agh0x01
4 жыл бұрын
Also, at 07:19 MacLeod's comments about the relatively inferior quality of plant protein "facilitating" sarcopenia and his anecdote about how he used a low protein vegan diet to drop some unneeded lean muscle mass strike me as disingenuous at best, outright disinformation at worst. From the starting point of a low-protein diet, there's of course possibly some difference in muscle retention for the same number of grams protein per kg bodyweight for animal vs plant protein sources, but it's unlikely to be substantial. Many people (including myself) build muscle just fine on plant-based diets, in some cases extraordinary amounts of muscle. Yet through lack of any qualification of his statements, MacLeod's comments could be construed as saying that muscle wastage is a foregone conclusion if a person's diet excludes animal protein. Recent research has compared groups consuming pea protein vs. whey protein, and reported: "Both groups experienced increased strength for 1RM back squat (p = 0.006) and deadlift (p = 0.008). No training effect (p > 0.05) was found for body composition, muscle thickness, IMTP peak force, IMTP rate of force development, or performance in either WOD. *Using PRE values as the covariate, there were no group differences for any measured variable. We conclude that ingestion of whey and pea protein produce similar outcomes in measurements of body composition, muscle thickness, force production, WOD performance and strength following 8-weeks of HIFT.*"
@semmtexx
4 жыл бұрын
Either way, Chris Sharma eats meat and sends harder than you ever will.
@willemvanriet7160
3 ай бұрын
These kind of advocacy doccies are why I don't want streaming anymore and prefer You Tube. The comments section si like peer review of content and doesn't exist on Netflix.
@boabigoe8923
4 жыл бұрын
Really enjoyed this deconstruction of the documentary. Has really clarified a lot for me. I feel that the main focus throughout was on meat and veganism, with a less substantial mention of non-meat, animal products (ie. milk, eggs). Might you be able to include the positives/negatives of these products in your next diet related video? (I've got a mild addiction to cheese so I'm hoping for purely positives in that regard! Unfortunately, I have my doubt about that...) I was also very surprised by the results of the two meta analysis you mentioned at the start, relating to the health implications of red and processed meat. Excited to give them a read! Cheers for more class content, keep it up!
@groghnash
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks! Looking forward to the next video
@natalienat7894
4 жыл бұрын
Disliked!!! Some of the greatest climbers are vegan, Steph Davis the fist woman to free the Salathe wall, Alex Honnold said that he’s been following a vegan diet in order to free solo El Cap!! As much as I like you as a climber Dave I strongly disagree with you being such an “ambassador” for the meat and dairy industry, are you sponsored by them???
@flatulentpaul
4 жыл бұрын
Great video. I would be very interested in a book by you on nutrition for climbing . I hope it's in the works, I'm a big fan of your other two books
@matthiasbauer808
4 жыл бұрын
This would be great!
@leoingson
4 жыл бұрын
I would enjoy a nutrition book for everyone, like a flowchart - according to your goals (health, energy, focus, longevity, ethical considerations, digestion, body development (muscle, sinews, bones..)..). I think some first stages of change apply to anyone, like getting away from industrial (junk) food. The mental change is pretty big (at least for me) - according recipes (book(s)) would be great to get going. This could change things. There is only(?) much shit on the market. Studying papers can't be the only way, even for educated people.
@fuggles2544
4 жыл бұрын
@Pierre Gleize are you an athlete?
@Scott-ec5uy
4 жыл бұрын
Paul focus on real food from the earth. Carbs are always the best energy source. Where can we find them? Plants :)
@flatulentpaul
4 жыл бұрын
👍
@Hutchslover
4 жыл бұрын
Hey Dave! Thanks for the interesting thoughts and your time that went into the video. No one is perfect so I won't go into little things like humans having the biggest brains and so on (it's only in relation to bodysize). A point I do want to make is about the environmental effects of meat consumption. I wouldn't dare try to make the point that all livestock is bad, we also oftentimes use them in conservational efforts as well. But the way things are going at the moment with the meat industry we are mostly pushing deforestation. People that do consume meat usually rather look for a good price than for local and ethically sourced products. So your point about unsuitable land for crop production works in schotland, but not so much in the Midwest of the US or in brazil where vast amounts of the crops go into the production livestock. The big herds in Australia/Brazil or the USA don't really eat grass at all, it's mostly soy and corn. If these areas where used to produce diverse sets of crops while also rearing small animals like chicken, which could also help with soil regeneration, we would be far better off with space to spare for conservation. A mostly plant based diet for most of the population would be enough to help with this issue. Because it still takes lots of energy to raise large livestock, or any animal. Thermodynamics and so on. I just think it's important to point out that meat production does take up quite a lot of space and resources and we should consume accordingly.
@bbwoolfy
4 жыл бұрын
I think that you have fallen foul of the latest round of vegan propaganda, which seems to be very selective on when (and where) deforestation began. Indonesia has been largely deforested (eg Sumatra is 95% deforestated, mainly for palm oil plantation) but this has been erased (conveniently) to push focus on amazon cattle ranches. Truth is, these amazon cattle 'ranches' are industrial factory farm feedlots, which is clearly wrong. But the primary reason for deforestation is logging. Then comes the 'golden' (fertile) period for arable production, then a lot of it is turned over to cattle feedlots (tertiary). Also, the work of the Savory institute proves that the absence of large bovine herds is driving desertification and Allan Savory has proven that reintroduction and constant moving of herds (mimicking pressure from predators) regenerates desertified areas (which amount to ⅔ of earth's landmass) therefore making the whole argument that cattle take up too much land, rather null and void.
@bbwoolfy
4 жыл бұрын
That was directed at @Hutchslover.
@Hutchslover
4 жыл бұрын
@@bbwoolfy Concerning the deforestation argument, sure, the logging itself is the main driver in areas with little to no Forest management and suficient biomass per tree. But that is hardly the reason to completely clear areas with arid shrubland with fire for example, that's why I didn't even name the amazon. I'm not really concerned with any agenda, I'm speaking from the point of a biologist. I think it's well established by now, that unregulated deforestation for any cause is bad, especially in areas with a biodiversity as high as Sumatras or even more so Borneo. I don't see where this issue has been erased. Neither in peoples minds nor the media does that appear to be the case. Concerning the regeneration of desertified areas, the method of choice is hardly universal. And in ecosystems that naturally do not have any large herds of bovines, this approach would lead to little more than create more ecological problems (e.g. australia). Plantations aswell as reintroduction of native flora and fauna would rather come to mind.
@bbwoolfy
4 жыл бұрын
@@Hutchslover Slash and burn has been a favoured form of clearing deforested land (from logging) for arable farming for a very long time now. Accelerated with the rise of globalisation. Taking a more sinister turn under Bolsinaro who wants to eradicate all indigenous people in Brazil. You did mention Brazil and I was involved in a recent discussion with vegans pushing the same arguments re pastured beef taking up too much land. One even promoting factory farming over pastured livestock. Incredible! But they were flooding me with all this carefully prepared, highly selective propaganda which erased global deforestation, particularly Indonesia (which is now dubbed 'sustainable' palm oil by virtue of some jedi mind tricks). Also Dave mentioned Amazon deforestation for beef in the video. So that's why I brought it up. In the work of the savory institute, restoring degraded/desertified land, I don't see any issue in regards to Australia, given that they have large bovine herds there already. The crux of the issue is in how the herds are managed. The problem being that with current (lack of) thinking animals are allowed to graze in areas for too long and thus impacting the plants and soil beyond repair. I see it as quite a natural low impact solution to restoring barren land and increasing biodiversity. Would you say the same re changing the hydrology of land to increase biodiversity? What harmful impact do you envisage from turning degraded/desertified land into rich fertile biodiverse land using Savory's methods?
@greengraycolor
4 жыл бұрын
bbwoolfy wwf un ipcc do not agree with you on this. At least 80 % deforestation is for feed for farm animals.
@geralddavis7401
4 жыл бұрын
I was strict vegetarian for 15 years. My health deteriorated. I found health and good athletic performance again in my 60s though a ketogenic diet. I am a keen cyclist and cycling coach. Now retired, I was a senior paediatric intensive care nurse throughout my professional career and taught anatomy and physiology to pre and post grad student nurses. There is nothing about our GI tract, our metabolism or our physiology that suggests we are plant based eaters. Zero.
@geralddavis7401
4 жыл бұрын
@Abel Abel Yes you certainly can but our anatomy and physiology is not that of a herbivore as David makes very clear above. I do include high fat low carb nuts and seeds in my foods but the best high quality nutrition comes from an inclusion of animal food products in a diet for humans. Ethically I wish we were herbivores which was my motivation for holding out for a significant part of my life. The truth is that we are not and I now eat to maximise my health. That requires food from animals. It's fine if you disagree with me Abel, you must do what you think is right.
@geralddavis7401
4 жыл бұрын
@Abel Abel Fortunately truth has never been governed by consensus. It is established through scientific evidence, not dogma. Archaeology shows the exact opposite of what you state here as fact. The rapid development of the human brain happened as a result of hunting being mankind's primary food source. Evidence of that is irrefutable from early settlement remains cave paintings etc. How many cave paintings are there of early man collecting bananas? At the advent of agriculture humans became smaller and their jaws narrower. Again, anyone who has studied would know this. Native Americans upon their discovery were found to be one of the healthiest, tallest and most immune resistant races and as is very well documented, their food sources were based on hunting - especially bison and every single part of those animals were used. Scientific evidence here: www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/05/010529071125.htm Clearly you only looked at the title of the video above and did not watch it. It gives clear anatomical and physiological evidence of the opposite of your unsupported statement. Evidence is what shows the truth. NOT consensus.
@molimba
4 жыл бұрын
Wow, me being one of the "vegan believers" for 2 years now, for many of the reasons given in this documentary, I'm shocked how thin these arguments are. Never cared to take a deeper look into the scientific literature, just because I like the idea of eating plants. Anyway, I want to thank you for this great breakdown, as it really opened my eyes to how much I was thinking in a box. However, not going to change much of my diet, because I feel good and I love the food I eat.
@Scott-ec5uy
4 жыл бұрын
Tibor Frei hey man! I think you might be interested in watching the “debunks of the Game Changer debunks” - check out Mic The Vegan or Dr Garth Davis. It’s important that there is a critique of the people “debunking” this documentary as they mistakenly overlook many hugely important concepts or fall to fallacies. 🙏🏼👍🏼
@molimba
4 жыл бұрын
@@Scott-ec5uy Will check it out, thanks mate.
@allenrnewbauer
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for posting. Great breakdown of the misleading information that was in The Game Changers.
@christopherbuchauer4859
4 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much man!! You are a straight LEGEND, keep this up. You inspire me to look more into everything like this.
@SoupCannot
4 жыл бұрын
Great content as always, Dave -- thank you for putting this out. I just wanted to push back on bioavailability aspect of your argument against plant protein (at 8:40). Having looked into the literature several years ago, I didn't find any evidence that plant protein is less bioavailable than animal protein, even though I was specifically looking for that. E.g., soy and beef have essentially the same PDCAAS score. However, I did find plenty of evidence that animal protein is generally superior for muscle building, since it has higher levels of BCAAs including leucine, so no qualms about that part of your argument.
@Danfranschwan2
4 жыл бұрын
Just because you couldnt find it doesn't mean the evidence is not out there... Bioavailability is widely researched and in my understanding based on the amino acid profile of the food which is then compared to the >human< needs for anabolism of proteins. And as you correctly stated that leucine plays a major part in muscle synthesis why then do you not understand why animal protein is more bioavailable?
@SoupCannot
4 жыл бұрын
@@Danfranschwan2 Bioavailability is a different concept from the completeness of the amino acid profile. Bioavailability refers to the body's ability to digest the protein. For example, some minerals like iron are known to be much less bioavailable from leafy greens than from red meat -- that is, even though there's iron in the plants, it's in a form that's not as readily absorbed by the body. If you have found evidence that a similar argument applies to proteins, you should link to it.
@jamescallanan4505
4 жыл бұрын
Hey Dave, thanks for the video. I am vegan for ethical reasons but am very healthy eating conscious. I was wondering if you had any good book/source recommendations for nutrition information. I would like to see the opposite point of view. Appreciate the research put in. As long as I can live a healthy live without killing I will, but I'd still like to know what the non plant based nutritionists have to say
@martinrenaudin7415
4 жыл бұрын
I disagree with your argument that eating plant based make you loose weight. I gain 4 kg of muscle when changing to vegan diet (because I watch carefully the amount of proteins that I eat but nonetheless). I can only speak for myself, but I feel I recover better with vegan diet, and i went from 3 / 4 training sessions a week to 4 / 5 training sessions a week, which help getting stronger than when I was on a meat diet ( I didn't eat junk foods except occasional chips and I still do). As for the digestive system, you didn't mention the PH of human digestive system which is the same as herbivores , and also carnivores don't have cholesterol.
@craigberesford440
4 жыл бұрын
Martin Renaudin - I’m able to put on muscle much easier on a plant based diet too. I used to be one of the guys who ate masses of meat thinking I needed it after training sessions. In fact , when I used to concentrate on protein sourced from animals, the muscle mass a density used to decline quickly. Plant based, my muscle mass and weight stays constant. 👍🏼
@ItzSkillful
4 жыл бұрын
Hi Martin -- I recently switched to a plant based as well but Ive found the opposite effect. May I ask what specifically you have been doing with your diet to achieve this? I probably havent been as rigorous with supplementing and I would love to know what I can do better. Cheers, Leo.
@martinrenaudin7415
4 жыл бұрын
@@ItzSkillful to sum up, cereals and leguminous plants, vegetables, oliv oil, all kind of seeds, and things like seitan, plant based steak that I cook with indredient like cgm, brewer's yeast, soya
@professorbellorum
4 жыл бұрын
Indeed, broad generalizations are usually dubious I went from a primarily plant-food high-carb diet (10% or less animal protein) (for most of my early life) to a high fat much higher animal-protein diet (30%+) and it basically changed my life -- I used to have ridiculous blood sugar fluctuations -- would crash my blood sugar, eat a pile of junky carbs, and then get stuck in a food coma for an hour. Adding a lot more fat and animal protein to my diet (especially in the form of a huge breakfast) made it possible for me to get into climbing!
@Tychipter
4 жыл бұрын
Hey Dave, great video as always. As someone in that generation (20s - 40s) it would be high in my ambitions to be more vegan / vegetarian and while this wouldn't put me off it does give me more reason to read up on it. With that in mind, (and I know you will be making the many promised videos on diet!) is there any books you would recommend to get a better grasp on diet not just from a general health, but additionally for performance?
@BrunoS1917
4 жыл бұрын
Just sat down after lunch and this video pops up. "Posted 40 seconds ago". Lucky day
@rippendale
4 жыл бұрын
Hey Dave, I really like your podcasts and your expertise on questions of nutrition and training are staggering and inspiring. But I must say towards the latter part of this video you say some stuff that has really made you drop in my esteem and where I do think that you must be following some hidden agenda yourself (as you're so keen to identify in the videos and vloggers you're criticising), because frankly, you're insulting your own intelligence and methodology on some of these statements. Before I elaborate, let me make it very clear that I agree with you in the general verdict on this film, it is utter hogwash. I'm also not a vegan evangelist myself. And I'm grateful for your in depth debunking of the nutrition myth of vegan nutrition being somehow healthier for the human body. But where I feel you truly veered off track and became guilty of the the very wrongdoings you spend the rest of the video identifying is when it comes to the environmental and ethical topics. Let me pick a few. Your recurring use of the biological argument of ecosystems and apex predators. I mean, purely considering in which company you place yourself when you use biological theory on the human and the 'role we play in the world', should be reason enough to abstain. I'm talking about people using darwinism and biological evolutionary theory to classify homosexuality as a disease, to develop human racial theories, to justify medieval gender structures, etc. If you're interested in going in depth into the question of how little biological patterns identified even in our closest relatives such as Orang Utangs apply to us as humans I recommend the free online vlog by Stanford University on Human Behavioral Biology. One might say that you are simply trying to make a point about our nutrition and how our body digests, etc. but you are clearly not doing only that. You are identifying humans as an apex predator and justify the ethicality of eating animal produce through our suggested 'role' in the ecosystem. These arguments are behavioral and will, if you decide to dive a little into the field of research on this, turn out to be dangerous pseudo-science that is very far off the mark. Not unlike the way you scoff at this one guy using the ridculous line of 'Does an Ox eat meat?' You're comment on monocropping and the cost that has on animal life. I will use your own vocabulary here: gross and intentional misrepresentation, creating an oversimplified association, establishing a cause-effect relationship that is obviously different and more complex in reality. Why? Because, of course, monocropping is not used only for plant-based nutrition. In fact, a humongous portion of it is actually used to feed animals that are farmed for meat production. Of course you know that and I'm quite sure you also know the proportional numbers of how much farmland is needed to support a plant based versus a meat diet. So I'm asking myself why you're chosing not to mention it and therefore implying that the very same argument doesn't apply to meat, when it fact it does, only tenfold. And this leads me to the 'worst' one, in my opinion. Throughout your video you chose to omit an essential prerequisite to almost all of your arguments not dealing with nutrition: The kind of meat-including diet you seem to be using as a reference must be a diet that uses only locally produced animal produce, or, more radically, only non-farmed animal produce, meaning meat obtained from hunting/fishing, etc. Which is to say a HIGHLY environmentally aware type of consumption that goes to great lenghts to only obtain the least impactful kind of animal produce. Why are you not making that point? Why do you chose to stoop as low as using the age-old argument of some areas of the world not being fit for plant farming and therefore animal farming being the more environmental and efficient type of obtaining food? Because, yes, this is true, but only under very specific assumptions. You are representing something as a general truth that is only true in very specific cases, which is a rhethoric that you grow well vexed about when the film does it for its own agenda. Because, and again I strongly suspect you know this, the overwhelming majority of the world's animal produce is NOT produced in these specific areas where plant farming is inefficient or impossible but instead using land and resources that could be used much more efficiently, environmentally and less invasively to support a plant-based nutrition. I really have to say I was shocked to hear these things coming from you, somebody who I had experienced as refreshingly level headed, a voice of reason and scientific rigour in a field of mainly exaggerated claims and simplifications. And then I see you doing the very same thing. Why?
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
Hi Simon, I've read your comment a few times and still not entirely clear about what your contention is. But taking the first point about ecosystems and evolution. I think you are reading something into what I'm saying that just is not there. I'm not sure how you got from basic human skeletal and gut structure and function to homosexuality! I was dealing with a far more basic idea that ecosystems function by animals eating other animals. Soil development, carbon capture in soil, biodiversity, and general function of healthy ecosystems depend on it. Even continued survival of ruminant animals depend on it. And we have been doing it as hominids for millions of years. My point is that its ridiculous to consider eating other animals unnatural. Nothing more. With respect to your second point, I do not advocate for feeding human edible crops to animals and never have. I would love to fight alongside vegans for better farming practice. Sadly I cannot while the movement insists on a solution that isn't a solution. However, it is certainly not true that 'humungous' amounts are fed to animals, unless you focus only the most inefficient countries. In the US for example 86% of cattle feed is forage. Of the remainder that is crop feed, most of it is crop residues that are unfit for human consumption. Almond husks and leftover grains from brewing etc. Would you rather these were left to methanotrophs outside the ruminants? This makes no sense. But it is simply false to say that crop production at scale without livestock uses less land. It uses far more land for one simple reason - it destroys the land. It strips the soil both of nutrients and by directly washing it away. It ends up in rivers and seas. It kills animals there too. Once it is washed away, the crop production must move to new land. Clearly this is unsustainable by definition. As for the third point, the data says otherwise. Properly raised animals can build soil, produce food that is suitably nutritious to sustain human health, fix nitrogen, carbon and other nutrients in the soil and do so with inputs of sunshine and rain. More land is needed, but this is not a cost, it is an opportunity. If there is one thing the earth needs more of it is topsoil.
@rippendale
4 жыл бұрын
@@climbermacleod Thanks for your detailed answer, but again, I find your argumentation strangely biased and hinting towards something other than a love for plain scientific rigour. I can't shakte the feeling that you're hell-bent on debunking the idea that a plant-based nutrition is better for the planet IN GENERAL. But it is, very much so, on a global statistical scale. The numbers you are using, though being right, again, create a wildly different image. For example, cattle feed. Yes, it largely consists of waste products (which could be perfectly used in biogas reactors just as a first idea for alternative use, although there are many others), but the amount of feed is SO large, that the 14% that remain end up consuming quantities of human-edible food beyond imagining. It is about keeping these ratios in scale, which you demand from the film you are criticising but weem unwilling to do yourself. 14% of the cattle feed used in the US, that is more than enough to feed the entire human population of the US! For further perspective, consider that even conservative estimates put the amount of soy going into animal feed at 75%. At least three quarters of all the soy grown on this planet go to feeding animals!! And the deforestation of the Amazon, the world's lungs, is largely due to soy farming. The climate cost of this is catastrophic. I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers on land degradation and the idea that somehow plant farming harms the land more than animal farming. This is only true (and even there I think only maybe, not my field of research) if you compare highly industrialized fertilisation-based agriculture with non-invasive small scale herding. Once you start looking at what is happening in the Texan plains with cattle farming for example, or in the Matto Grosso, this idea totally disintegrates. The groundwater there will be contaminated for who knows how long. Even what sheep are doing to the peat landscape around your home is more than anything contribution to eroding the topsoil and inhibiting the growth of plants that would actively take CO2 out of the atmosphere. To end with your final statement, what the world needs more of, I would specify, is forests, if the slim chance of averting climate change is to be realized. Of course, also plant farming has to become less invasive, less chemical, etc. But reducing meat in our global production scale is by far the quickest and most efficient way to reduce our everyday carbon footprint. Every serious climate or environmental science group is making this point. Surely it's not in your interest to contest that?
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
@@rippendale Theres no need to speculate that I’m supporting the idea that a plant based diet is not optimal for the planet. The scientific data is quite clear that this is the case. I am just relating this data. I know its challenging for vegans to hear and the most ardent of them can only reconcile this by accusing folk who read science of actually being secret meat industry shills. Or just supplying death threats. But this is ridiculous. Again, I am not and never have advocating for cutting down rainforests in the Amazon to grow soy. This is clearly madness and if the vegan movement could reel back from an equally mad solution, I’d love to fight on the same side as them on this issue. While I think it’s critical not to burn down today’s rainforest, I also think we are becoming dangerously distracted from the ancient rainforests we burn every time we use fossil fuels for power. What I am against is the notion that all meat eating should stop, since this is both unnecessary and would result in still more damage to the environment as well as to human health. I know it is tricky to see, but there is a third alternative that lies between cutting down the Amazon to feed cows and mass veganism which destroys the soil and causes malnutrition. The alternative is sensible and sustainable farming practice. This involves animals since animals build soil, increase biodiversity, keep water in the soil and do not need any chemical inputs at all. Forests are certainly important. But climate scientists are in fact warning about undervaluing grasslands theconversation.com/when-tree-planting-actually-damages-ecosystems-120786 Just thinking of carbon alone, one reason grasslands are important is because more of the carbon is stored beneath the ground. Forests are by comparison vulnerable to losing their carbon. For this reason, when carbon storage is modelled, grasslands are the more reliable carbon sink iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aacb39 The climate needs grasslands, grasslands need ruminants, ruminants need predators. This was my point about considering the unintended consequences when you start to interfere and artificially reduce animal numbers (not least when they already massively reduced in terms of biomass science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6386/310 ). It is false that climate scientists are universally arguing for switching to plant based diets. In fact, many are beginning to worry about the distraction from the cause of climate change - fossil fuels. www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/12/losing-time-not-buying-time/ www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-a-new-way-to-assess-global-warming-potential-of-short-lived-pollutants/amp?__twitter_impression=true What is in my interest is to look at the actual science and act based on that. PNAS modelled the complete elimination of animals from the US food supply in 2017 and concluded that this would reduce GHG emissions by 2.6%, while at the same time causing malnutrition and humans to further exacerbate the overconsumption of calories to reach basic nutrient thresholds. www.pnas.org/content/pnas/114/48/E10301.full.pdf It’s worth noting that this analysis uses current farming practice in its model, which no-one advocates for. If farming practice were improved as it has been shown in the literature www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X17310338 These numbers would be in the fraction of a percent. Meanwhile, climate change continues while we fly our avocados and carrots around the world fuelled by ancient rainforests. Do you advocate for this?
@chillpurr275
4 жыл бұрын
Hi @@climbermacleod , Since you probably reference the 86% from this (1) study by the FAO (2) you should also have a look at their more recent report (3) which still states the negative environmental impacts of animal products. Mottet also contributed to this more recent report after the release of (1). (I did not copy every mentioning of animal products or meat since this would blow up my post even more.) (1) Livestock: On our plates or eating at our table? A new analysis of the feed/food debate (Mottet et al., 2017) www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2211912416300013 (2) FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (3) The future of food and agriculture - Alternative pathways to 2050. (FAO. 2018.) www.fao.org/3/I8429EN/i8429en.pdf ("TSS = Towards sustainability scenario HIC = High-income countries BAU = Business as usual scenario LMIC = Low- and middle-income countries GHG = Greenhouse gas RCP = Representative concentration pathways SSS = Stratified societies scenario") "Food and agriculture are impacted by and contribute to climate change. The food and agricultural sectors will not only be impacted by climate change, they are also among its main contributors. Although GHG emissions resulting from agriculture, forestry and other land-use (AFOLU) have almost stabilized over the past 25 years, the agricultural sector still produces close to 20 percent of total global GHG emissions (see Figure 1.15). And although forests help to mitigate climate change by removing GHG from the atmosphere through biomass growth, they can only do so much.(*33) Most of agriculture’s methane emissions are produced by rice cultivation and enteric fermentation during the digestive processes of ruminant animals. The nitrous oxide emissions originate mainly from the application of nitrogen-based fertilizers for food and feed production and animal manure management, while carbon dioxide is released from the clearing of forests for cropland and pasture (Gerber et al., 2013; FAO, 2016a). (*34) The wide range of emission factors across countries and regions suggests that there is potential to lower GHG from food and agricultural sectors. This implies jointly examining the overall impacts of the agrifood sector, which includes food and feed demand, food loss and waste, other uses of agricultural outputs (fibres, biofuels, etc.), water usage and its effects on soil health, ecosystem services and biodiversity. For instance, there is a growing recognition that diets rich in meat - particularly ruminants such as cattle - are associated with both higher environmental costs and higher GHG emissions. National dietary guidelines recommending lower red meat consumption, particularly to consumers largely exceeding recommended dietary intakes, could significantly help to reduce GHG emissions (IFPRI, 2015). Also, it is estimated that emissions from the livestock sector could be reduced by at least 30 percent if producers adopted the practices applied by those with the lowest emission intensity (Gerber et al., 2013). However, evolving food systems increasingly lead to intensive production and longer food supply chains, which can be associated with higher GHG emissions from both production inputs (e.g. fertilizers, machinery, pesticides, veterinary products and transport) and activities beyond the farm gate (e.g. transportation, processing and retailing; FAO, 2017a). Overall, future GHG emissions from agriculture and the extent to which reducing them can contribute to reducing global GHG emissions will be contingent upon the amount of agricultural output that will have to be produced to satisfy demand, at different degrees of food loss and waste, as well as the types of technologies that will be adopted for crop and livestock production." "Compared with the BAU scenario, TSS is characterized by lower preferences for animal-based foods and vegetable oils and fats, especially in HIC. These assumptions rely on the hypothesis that consumers are on average more educated and better informed about the health and environmental impacts of excessive consumption of animal proteins, especially meat. Dietary shifts towards more fruit and vegetables and less animal protein imply lower malnutrition, including reduced child and adult obesity. In the TSS scenario, consumers are also assumed to be more concerned about food waste than in BAU." "In TSS a lower consumption of animal products, particularly in HIC, and reduced GHG intensity (improved GHG efficiency) lead to total emissions being reduced by 17 percent between 2012 and 2050. Despite the expansion of animal herds, specifically in LMIC (excluding China) (see Figure 4.12) more efficient livestock production systems mean emissions from this sector are almost unchanged by 2050. While there is no assumed change in the efficiency of synthetic fertilizer use, it is progressively phased out by 2050, thus eliminating this emissions quotient (see Table 4.15).(*114)" "These findings from the TSS scenario indicate that containing agricultural expansion to move agricultural sectors towards sustainability, while also increasing food availability, is possible, particularly in the case of LMIC. However, achieving such results rests on the assumption that a set of synergic strategic orientations will be undertaken, including, among others: * making prices “right” by ensuring that they reflect all the costs associated with the production and consumption of agricultural products, including environmental costs, so that those costs are charged to resource users;" * reducing feed requirements, for example, through improved livestock management and avoiding excessive meat consumption;" "Overall, significant changes in food and agricultural systems are required to move towards sustainability. GHG emissions must be drastically reduced to contain average temperature increases and mitigate other climate change impacts.(*115) Change is therefore needed in terms of both demand (to raise consumer awareness on sustainability) and supply (to increase the GHG efficiency of agricultural production processes). This includes switching to low-GHG intensity technologies (FAO, 2018) and/or consuming products that involve lower emissions (such as poultry instead of beef). Making such improvements in the future requires efforts to “internalise environmental externalities” - i.e. to account for environmental costs that are currently not covered and boost investment in resource-efficient technologies. Such mitigation and adaptation efforts could increase agricultural production costs, which could then reflect on consumer prices as highlighted in Section 4.3. Rising food prices could have a knock-on effect on nutrition levels, but should not be of concern as long as income, income-earning opportunities and food distribution move towards increasing equity within and across countries (see Section 4.5)." (*33) "The removal of GHG by forests has fallen from 2.8 Gt annually in the 1990s to an estimated 1.8 Gt in 2014 (FAO, 2016a). The decline is believed to be linked to increasing variability in climate and atmospheric composition." (*34) "Ruminant production has other significant social and environmental impacts, including comparatively higher withdrawals of freshwater, more pollution and greater antimicrobial use (which carries the risk of increased antimicrobial resistance and potentially more outbreaks of zoonotic diseases)" (*114) "Less drastic assumptions regarding the phasing out of synthetic fertilizers would lead to a more moderate reduction of GHG from this source." (*115) "The projected scenario-specific GHG emission changes in agriculture are compatible with the maximum emissions that should not be exceeded in order to stay within the specific RCP associated with each scenario, under the assumption that all the other sectors in the economy move with the same order of magnitude (see Table 3.6). Notably, the 20 percent increase under BAU would allow it to stay within RCP 6.0, which implies average temperatures increase by 2100 between 3.1 and 3.7 degrees Celsius. The 42 percent increase in SSS would point towards RCP 8.5, which implies temperature increases above 4 degrees Celsius. The 29 percent reduction in TSS is close to the upper bound of mitigation to stay within RCP 4.5, which implies temperature increases of between 2.3 and 2.9 degrees Celsius. Further efforts would be needed to reduce GHG emissions with respect to those simulated in TSS in order to point towards RCP 2.6 - i.e. to contain average temperature increases by 2100 below or in the vicinity of 2 degrees Celsius." There is no "the cause" of climate change, there are many causes and (animal) agriculture is one of them. About "soil carbon sequestration/beef": www.ox.ac.uk/news/2017-10-03-grass-fed-beef-good-or-bad-climate (in-depth study behind the article: www.fcrn.org.uk/sites/default/files/project-files/fcrn_gnc_report.pdf ) I again reccomend the recent IPCC (4) special report on "Climate Change and Land" (5) that still supports the fact that a vegan diet is better for the environment (it also acknowledges Mottet et al., 2017). (4) IPCC: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change. (5) Climate Change and Land - (An IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems): www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2019/08/Fullreport-1.pdf (full report) or www.ipcc.ch/report/srccl/ Cheers, Sebastian.
@MindSurf248
2 жыл бұрын
Love your channel and content, and really enjoyed this video, the environmental points at the end were misleading though. From my own masters almost all food emissions reduction pathways rely upon a significant reduction of meat consumed globally. It is fair to say this doesn't need to be an eradication, and there are reasons why a well managed sustainable animal product agriculture might bring some benefits, but it's not strictly necessary. More importantly the methane point at @42:00 has a few flaws. 1. The methane is synthesised within cattle, it is far more potent than CO2 and is not sequestered in the same way as the carbon cycle. 2. The point that methane degrades after a short time (9 years-ish) so therefore a stable herd size = zero emissions is incorrect accounting, ignoring the fact that atmospheric methane concentration has nearly quadrupled in the last 250 years, and that to maintain a heard as opposed to downsizing it, carries an opportunity cost that maintains an artificially high concentration that will cause more warming. Also herd sizes are being kept small in the western world partially as they are supplemented by imports from herd expansion in the developing world, who are seeing significant social and environmental impacts from the rise of industrial cattle farming. On a similar point, a large amount of land use of cattle farming is due to either cattle feed been grown in significant volume, or forest clearance to graze cattle. Add to that the opportunity cost of not restoring wetlands/forestland/peatlands because it is needed for grass fed cattle - there are significant enviro-impacts. Finally a large-proportion of the land inappropriate for crop agriculture that is used for grazing is used by pastoralists, a form of agriculture under direct threat from industrial farming and inconsistent with the 'efficiencies' needed to maintain the current trajectory of global meat consumption. Again great video, it's given me a lot to think about from a nutritional perspective, but probably worth been careful on the environmental arguments if it's not a direct area of study.
@climbermacleod
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the comment. Sure, there are plenty of modelling studies that conclude less animal food will reduce emissions. But I wonder if you can show me one that measures food correctly (in nutrients rather than kcals or kgs) and addresses the land use consequences of mono crop agriculture (soil death). I'm not quite sure what you mean by methane not being sequestered in the same way as the carbon cycle. The point was that fossil carbon is not part of the biogenic carbon cycle and methane from ruminants (who acquire those carbon atoms from the atmosphere, via grass) is.To your point 2: The sources of increased methane concentrations are addressed in the video in reference 25. Did you read this paper? Other work from Myles Allen at the IPCC, Michelle Cain and others has shown that the stable herd sizes over long periods do not add to warming (correcting earlier incorrect accounting of GWP100). Speaking of opportunity cost, Allen himself has pointed out that there is a rather more worrying opportunity cost of becoming distracted from the big fish (fossil carbon) by focusing on reducing herd sizes which offer only a one off pulse of cooling for a couple of decades. This of course is not to mention the opportunity cost of a human nutrition disaster, or the carbon emissions of healthcare costs as a result of dealing with it. No, herd sizes in the west are smaller largely because of improved veterinary care (genetics, care standards, nutrition) which increase yield of meat and milk per animal raised. I'm totally with you on forest clearance for cattle grazing. However, note that cattle grazing is also used to protect forests from degradation and outright destruction from fire. Its about the management. Also note that nearly 90% of cattle feed is human inedible, much of it waste products from human food production. Should we send brewers hops, corn stalks and pea husks to landfill instead? Broadly though, I'm with you that cattle should eat mostly grass. I think your final point about the efficiencies of industrial farming as it is currently practised being needed is debatable. However, I would certainly agree pastoralism is under threat and that is a very big problem.
@MindSurf248
2 жыл бұрын
@@climbermacleod Thanks for such a thought out reply. I'm pulling together a proper response so will post tomorrow when less busy. To risk been a kiss arse, your a legend mate, properly inspired me to move from (Leeds) gym climbing to chasing trad and mountaineering so thank you.
@fearthbeard13
4 жыл бұрын
The problem with most of the studies around meat vs veggie/vegan is the sample sizes and the longevity of studies is so small it’s makes the studies almost redundant and that type of evidence would need such a huge study. Neither argument can paint a real picture! Thus leads to people’s opinions of ‘feeling better’ from one diet versus another is taken as hard evidence. This diet worked for X this diet worked for Y doesn't mean it will be working for everyone. I struggle with sweeping statement films!
@craigberesford440
4 жыл бұрын
Been fell running and trail running for 25 years. Went fully Plant Based 2 years ago and never felt better. Route times have improved, recovery faster and my hip joint inflammation has vanished. Climbing wise, I’m just as strong and my body composition is leaner and feel generally better all round. For information: my diet is around 95% wholefood organic. Pretty much no processed food at all. Works for me anyway.
@samheaney1331
4 жыл бұрын
Felt exactly the same in terms of my performance and energy levels, I originally did it for the animals but the added health benefits have been amazing. Its a shame to see Dave take this stance I'd like to say your diet was a personal choice and whatever you want to do is ok. Unfortunately the meat heavy diet condemns billions of animals to abhorrent conditions and brutal deaths every year.
@chrissmithdoe2100
4 жыл бұрын
if you carefully listen to Dave, what he says here in no way contradicts your experiences...
@eddytheeditor
11 ай бұрын
Ah Dave! Your videos are brilliant. Can't believe I've only just come across this. To hear someone eductated and intellient break down some of these arguments so well is fantastic. Thank you.
@MattFixesStuff
4 жыл бұрын
"all amino acids must be eaten at the same time for optimal performance.." - Source please. Also you can easily make a vegan meal that has all essential amino acids... I accidently stumbled upon your video, but halfway through I get the impression that there is lots of misinformation here. There is many powerful and strong vegan athletes in all kinds of sports, even more than are shown in the movie. A vegan girl lately did a new world record in the plank btw.... I dont get your points at all, considering we are living on a planet that is dying and animal agriculture being one of the biggest contributors to that. Also the enormous animal cruelty that goes in non vegan products is frightening and sick. I have no idea how anyone can still support eating animals when we can live happy and healthy on plants.
@adamjskater
4 жыл бұрын
"A vegan girl lately did a new world record in the plank btw" surely it wouldn't be fair to list all of the records meat eaters happen to have broken recently? Dave spoke specifically about the benefits of vegan diets in training for endurance feats.
@norcofreerider604
4 жыл бұрын
"all amino acids must be eaten at the same time for optimal performance.." You realize that the amino acid profile of single source plant protein is incomplete, and this limits the synthesis of certain proteins, right? When your body has excess amino acids floating around that it can't use because it is missing other amino acids, it doesn't store them, it burns (metabolizes) them. This means that you would need to consume multiple different plant protein sources in the same sitting in order to get a balanced amino acid profile. This problem doesn't exist if you are eating animal protein. This also ignores the issue of lowered bio-availability of plant protein.
@minesadab
4 жыл бұрын
@@norcofreerider604 Do you need to consume a complete amino acid profile with every meal or would it be sufficient to consume enough of each protein over a day or so (e.g. as might be the case in intermittent fasting)? This is almost a moot point as the vast majority of plant-based meals consist of multiple types of plants anyway.
@SirCharcoal
4 жыл бұрын
You only mention once that it's probably possible to be healthy on a vegan diet. Surely it's worth the effort, and the promotion to avoid factory farming in all its forms. Sure, if everyone ate local, grass fed, free roaming and well looked after animals that would be okay. But it's naïve at best to think that's possible for the entire world. So I agree there are a lot of rubbish arguments floating around, and false science in movies such as this that people should be aware of. But! This video comes across as an attack on the idea of eating plant based (possibly from point of view of defending eating meat?). Especially the monocropping footage and the KZitemr snippets! Those seem out of place for an evidence based impartial commentary.
@rudolphteperberry3888
4 жыл бұрын
Surely it would be easier to to persuade everyone to eat local free range meat than to persuade everyone to go vegan. I think it would be naïve at best to think otherwise. To me it seems more like an attack on the partial information and misinformation in the documentary than simply an attack on eating a plant based diet. I do agree (based on the relatively little I know) that veganism is far better ethically and almost certainly environmentally, but whether its better for personal health is highly debatable and also highly dependant on the individual. Dave doesn't seem to deny any of that.
@SirCharcoal
4 жыл бұрын
@@rudolphteperberry3888 How do you plan on persuading the masses to eat local free range, well raised, grass fed animals given most people have blinkers on and ignore where their food comes from? More importantly, how do you plan on feeding the whole world in this way? Factory farming exists as the only way of providing enough meat for what has become the norm of meat consumption, and it's indefensible. As a side note. I used to think just buying free range eggs from the supermarket was good enough. I would also buy meats that weren't basic/value, just the normal supermarket produce and I'd convinced myself it was probably ethical, after all I live in a country (UK) with reasonable animal rights protections I had thought... It doesn't take much to disprove this if you actually try and look into how chickens and pigs are kept and slaughtered. You would not want their lives.
@rudolphteperberry3888
4 жыл бұрын
Charlie Palmer I don't plan on doing it, I'm just saying that it would be far easier than persuading the whole world to go vegan and it would no doubt be a necessary stepping stone towards your vegan utopia. I personally think people consume way too much meat and dairy (for health as well as ethics and environment). I eat way less than I did a few years ago (from around twice a day to around twice a week), and if everyone did the same then almost certainly local free range would cover the demand. Again I'm not saying everyone would, especially considering the amount of idiots whose argument in favour of meat doesn't extend beyond "I love bacon too much". And again, I'm not trying to argue that even the most ethically sourced meat is as ethical as a vegan diet, but surely if you're in the UK you know that true free range, small scale farms do exist here. Cows and sheep especially live a comfortable life in the fields, but yes I agree their deaths are a very unfortunate and so far unavoidable part of the whole process (of course I wouldn't want their life but I'm not well suited to living in a field). There are pigs and chickens on farms near me that are truly free range. Tbh I think there are only 2 reasons I still eat meat. The first is weak will, and the second is purely selfish in that I'm not yet convinced meat free is healthier (granted that's a can of worms!). I don't think it will be so long, in the scheme of things, before we have access to synthetic meat which really could be a game changer.
@SirCharcoal
4 жыл бұрын
@@rudolphteperberry3888 Fair enough! I agree that cows and sheep get a better deal in life. Personally I found it easier to go straight to being vegan, but I can imagine that's not the same for everyone It's worth knowing that even if you buy your meat from good local farms, the milk/egg/chicken that are in pizza, cakes, pastries, meal deals, chocolate, restaurant meals etc often do not say where they're from. Which sadly makes it likely they're using the cheapest and ugliest sources for these ingredients
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
@Charlie Palmer I would say that what would be naive would be to suggest that we can make a sustainable food supply without ruminants and without good animal care and farming practice. My point of adding the clips you mentioned was to ask if the movie is going to present a series of anecdotes as it does, why does it not address the other high profile anecdotes who have a quite different experience, or the environmental damage caused by poor plant farming practice. If the film had highlighted those, then others would not need to.
@daniellegoodspeed5800
4 жыл бұрын
You started your discussion by rolling your eyes and saying something like "a plant based diet whatever that is." If you don't know what defines a plant based diet, you should not be analyzing it or if you are disrepecting it so disdainfully, you should not be analyzing it. You are unaware of the huge difference between a plant based diet and a vegan philosophy. In the film they do not say vegan diet, they say plant based. Most people in the movie do not care about animal rights. Veganism is not a way to eat. Also the research paper you referenced in the beginning about meat and even processed meat being good to eat has been discredited. That article is as science based as a flat earther using science to prove the earth is flat. Also, you are a keto diet supporter, so your analysis of a plant based diet is as biased as trump discussing how the United States Consitution is fake news. You have a huge bias and are so anti carbohydrate you cannot be impartial. You accuse this documentary of having the very bias you have. Your analysis was disappointing in all ways. You went for the same shock points every anti-plant based person does. When the weight lifter makes the ox comment he is saying that the ox is big and strong and it does not eat meat. Of course humans cannot absorb nutrients from cellulose. Duh, but using our digestive system we also don't need meat to live and get big and strong if you want. You know soy protein is as comperable as any other animal based protein, you have read he papers. You also said gladiators had no choice about what they ate. So? How does that affect the results. Research animals abused and mutilated in labs have no choice what is done to them yet many science studies are done on them. I could go on with everything you said. What would be better is for you to actually have a discussion with some pro-plant based scientists rather than sitting in a chair making fun of them out of context.
@kimediamond
4 жыл бұрын
By "whatever that is" Dave was implying that in most ill researched articles or documentaries, the term 'plant-based' is not clearly defined and can be used quite flexible, in order to suit the argument. And what the hell is anti-carbohydrate? Go ramble somewhere else.
@philscheuer2079
4 жыл бұрын
You're my role model Dave! I'm having my ninth cuppa black /w milk this morning and feel something is changing! ;)
@johnt2902
4 жыл бұрын
your scientific approach and critical analysis of this, and using your platform with a climbing audience is so refreshing. Allot of my friends have switched to this under the precedence of documentaries like the one you watch. A healthy balance seems to be a much healthier way to live, and the cutting out of the western diet and reverting back to the home cooked meals with high quality food as opposed to processed food.
@suezix8689
4 жыл бұрын
10/10 with honours. I am an atheist, which means I don't believe in miracles. Any documentary purporting to show us the Light gets my spider sense tingling. I did watch the trailer of this documentary though, and the 'smooth' transition from saying 'gladiators ate a principally meat-free diet' to a few seconds later asserting that 'gladiators were totally meat-free' did it for me. Shabby, which your fantastic dissection confirms aplenty. Thanks for that. Should be recommended viewing for any fan of the Game changers and its ilk.
@obsdablobs
4 жыл бұрын
Hi Dave. Thanks for the video and perspective on the movie. I’d be interested to see you do one on the other Netflix movie ‘What the Health’ - when you have another free Saturday eve..!!! Cheers
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
It's total junk. Take your nutrition advice from good science, not Hollywood.
@chrisfizz5172
4 жыл бұрын
Great video. Very interesting information. Thanks a lot Dave!
@spacescienceguy
3 жыл бұрын
Thanks for doing this review. I've been pretty disappointed with health-focused vegan/plant-based documentaries so far. Nutrition is by its nature an imprecise science, and documentaries in general are not the best way to communicate health science. It's complicated, but a documentary has to be short and punchy with a powerful message. I'm not defending it, but I understand why they did it the way they did and used a sample size of 3 for some of their tests during the documentary. I've been vegan for 6 years, and my perspective is that it has nothing to do with health for me. I know this wasn't the point of your video, but I think it's worth me mentioning. If including some non-human animal products meant I'd be a bit more healthy, or a bit better at climbing, I still wouldn't include them in my diet for the same reason I wouldn't include human animal products in my diet if it made me a bit healthier/stronger. For me, it's just about the ethics. I will say that I think you're partially wrong about B12. B12 in animal products comes in no small part from supplements injected into animals prior to slaughter to supplement B12 in humans, since it's hard to get enough from natural sources. Eating more meat will help with B12, sure, but so will getting B12 from any other supplement.
@giopilli1
4 жыл бұрын
An heavily debunked documentary with a series of bombastic statements with weak or distorted evidence - may be sponsored by one the new vegan burgers company. Moral of the story eat more balanced. Very nice video and very informative- thank you for your work. You make an interesting point on muscle optimization: may be the most interesting unanswered question is: is veggie protein better for muscle optimization versus muscle growth ? (Again another reason to eat balanced)
@TheTeknikFrik
4 жыл бұрын
How did 47 minutes go by so fast? Great video!
@ThomasFEder-bs7ro
16 күн бұрын
This is a lot of effort to justify his own decisions. Not eating meat is mostly an ethically motivated decision and it’s great to have information out there about professional sportsman, who perform and are plantbased. + the video suggests at least between the lines that the effort to reduce meat, be vegetarian or pescatarian or otherwise not meateating is not as healthy as eating meat, which is just not true. If you don’t give a shit about the climate crisis, and all the other environmental catastrophes meateating largely contributes to, go ahead and follow Mr MacLeod. I won’t anymore..if you do care, keep experimenting and find your own way.. eating meat is not the way to go, if you want to enjoy climbing and nature in the future..
@ExplanatoryApe
4 жыл бұрын
A lot of straw man arguments here. The movies not fantastic, but I'd suggest spending less time in righteous indignation and more time considering the elements of the movie that actually challenge your understanding.
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks. Would you mind being a bit more specific. Which arguments were straw men? What is it you think I should be considering from the movie that I didn't?
@michaelmacdonald170
4 жыл бұрын
@@climbermacleod I don't understand the need for people to be contenriously commenting from an un-named or ethical point of view here You probably should have named the video "from a sport or health perspective" as people are largely commenting due to the ethics. In many cases rightly so. I understand the scrutiny you must face as a professional trying to provide unbiased content to the general population. What would the harm in eating butcher/ local grocer produce from 10miles down the road as opposed to the classic vegan avocado flown in? Its worth separating the ethical/ environmental and health arguments for future production- to save you having to read idiotic commentary. As always, eye opening content from you Dave, cheers for it and please continue
@ExplanatoryApe
4 жыл бұрын
@@climbermacleod will do mate, will get back to you in a bit :)
@Sam-hd9cj
4 жыл бұрын
To anybody curious about why this movie is deceptive : kzitem.info/news/bejne/padqp6SZa4qcaoY
@Gabrielowns321
4 жыл бұрын
The real question is, looking into the future, could we sustain a non plant-based world in terms of climate change and water/land availability. Also, do you value marginal nutritional gains over life?
@largeformatlandscape
4 жыл бұрын
Yes - low meat, insects, a balanced approach to agriculture wih mixed livestock and crops. Lots of important ways to keep the planet alive. Not sure a vegan diet will save the planet. Campaigning for animal welfare will certainly do more than not eating meat.In the long term, synthetic forms of food will be the way forward
@PaulHeathcote1
4 жыл бұрын
Really enjoyed this video. Thanks Dave.
@lunalaus1224
4 жыл бұрын
When you showed the video of "raw alignment" who turned away from a vegan diet I think it is important to mention that she had a eating disorder before she went vegan and that that lingered on through her later diets (from what I have notice. She was raw vegan for a time and by watching the videos of her, to me it seemed like she just didn't eat enough. She'd have two smoothies and a salad a day, and that absolutely will lead to some deficiencies... So maybe it wasn't because of her being vegan, but of her not eating enough ... I really enjoyed watching your critical take on this documentary.
@terraflow__bryanburdo4547
4 жыл бұрын
"They didn't do it right" is the default defensive position of vegans as concerns ex-vegans. Alyse is one out of *thousands* who are forced to abandon veganism every month, much less every year. Almost all of the people who give video testimony as ex-vegans are intelligent, credible, and made every effort to carry through on what they believed was the "ideal diet". If a diet is truly natural and healthy, why is it so damned hard for even dedicated, educated people to "get it right"? Alyse and the others didn't fail the diet. The diet failed them, as it did for me many decades ago. Films like "Game Changers" are part of a concerted, profit-driven and cynical move to completely convert the food supply to one that is controlled at the corporate, global level. The only sustainable pushback is to support local, pasture-fed, animal-based farming and distribution. F*ck Monsanto, Cargill, and cynical manipulators like James Cameron and Arnold (neither of whom is vegan btw).
@InhumanRYLO
4 жыл бұрын
I believe this comment commits the straw-man fallacy.
@telkmx
4 жыл бұрын
@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547 "Films like "Game Changers" are part of a concerted, profit-driven and cynical move to completely convert the food supply to one that is controlled at the corporate, global level." lol dude not sure the discussion can go further than this
@thenayancat8802
8 ай бұрын
Just noting here the absurdity of implying veganism is being pushed by some nefarious corporate lobby given the depth and power of the animal agriculture lobby around the world. Truly, these people live in a fantasy land
@dantheboulderdad8567
4 жыл бұрын
Would love to see a day of eating video!
@nicos606
4 жыл бұрын
Disappointing
@oliviervandeschilde9059
4 жыл бұрын
Dave, have you decided not to make or upload the detailed video about why you aren't vegan that you planned at that time? I am very curious to the information.
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
No I will do this, but just have my hands full with another project at present. It takes a lot of work to produce this sort of video, so I can't say exactly when I would publish it, but I definitely will because it is important.
@petrgeveiler2265
2 жыл бұрын
Hi, Dave! You know so much about nutrition! Do you have a video about how to prepare food? I am not sure, but some people say that the way we prepare food has an impact on the nutritions in it. If there is no video about this theme on your channel yet, can you recommend something to read or to watch?
@ruggeroama9464
4 жыл бұрын
With all the due respect, I think that your dismissal of the ethical reasons to become a vegan is based on poor arguments. It would have been at least fairer to reference the reasons to become a vegan which are based on very strong arguments. Thank you for the video!
@largeformatlandscape
4 жыл бұрын
I think the subject was nutrition and Dave's response was about the same.. Ethical reasons are personal and contextual and I would agree that most meat eaters aren't really considering an ethical point of view. This doesn't mean that all meat eaters have an unthought and irresonsibly unethical approach to their diet. e.g. deer need culling in scotland, insects can provide protein, soil cultivation needs either chemicals or animals to keep things cycling. etc. Complex subjects but I think a totally vegan world is possible but a long way away yet.
@ruggeroama9464
4 жыл бұрын
Tim Parkin hi Tim, I didn’t want to sound not respectful and you r right that the main subject was nutrition. However the argument that yourself mention and that Dave referred to (the destruction of insects-small animals with farming et al.) is very weak and the overall ethical reasons for going vegan are very strong. However I think that Dave (rightly so considering his personal experience) is far too emotionally involved. If we consider only science and the argument of nutrition then yes, meat is correlated to cancer (ref WHO and other cancer organizations, IARC ref says meat is cancer 1 and 2a in the carcinogenic classification, cancer research UK states that 8800 fewer cases of cancer if no one ate red or processed meat in the UK)). Possible reasons include: way of cooking it, Fe heme oxidative stress, change of biome (putrefaction vs fermentative with vegan), salt and nitrates in processed meat, saturated fats. Finally, Dave refers to a latest methanalysis which he says states there is no correlation. That is not entirely true. The correlation is confirmed but in the conclusions there is a mistification on the overall impact on a society (the paper says the impact is small when in fact is still relevant at a National or world scale). Anyway, I do not want to take one side, I am just saying what we know so far from a medical point of view.
@largeformatlandscape
4 жыл бұрын
I think the confidence in the cancer correlation is hovering around the edge of statistically significant in the western world and the differences to the other parts of the world are probably due to other factors (as you mention). Ethically, going low meat is stronger than going vegan by all counts, obviously depends on your balance of priorities - the extremes of omnivores, vegetarians and vegans are all unhealthy to us and the planet - even most current vegetarian diets are probably incredibly harmful. In fact I would say that a simple "eat less meat, eat healthier, know where your food comes from and it's impact" are the three strongest directives for us and the planet. e.g. In Scotland here, it's easy to lead a well sources, low meat diet without impact. In cities in the UK it's a lot harder. Thoughtful action trumps lifestyle every day,
@rockclimbinghacks9222
4 жыл бұрын
Climbing is not environmentally friendly or sustainable, and it's not ethical.
@ruggeroama9464
4 жыл бұрын
Eric Moss why?
@tomtom4405
4 жыл бұрын
I'm still confused bro... If an Ox eats a Vegan, will it still be as strong as if it had only eaten soy and is that why Jurek is an apex herbivore?
@ns1extreme
Жыл бұрын
It's curious how you say the epidemiological studies don't count because it compares to a normal western diet, yet the meta studies you cite are the ones that don't say what food the meat replaces. While you conveniently ignore the reviews that show that meat consumption is negatively affecting all those health outcomes and you only get this non-effect when meat is compare with refined carbs, which is what people normally replace meat with if there's no other information about it in the study. Compared with vegetables, whole-grains and unsaturated fat meat consumption increase your risk of disease.
@chillpurr275
4 жыл бұрын
Another nice read: ourworldindata.org/less-meat-or-sustainable-meat "As consumers, the biggest difference we can make is to eat more plant-based sources of protein such as tofu, nuts, peas, and beans. This is the case regardless of where you are in the world."
@KarelSeeuwen
2 ай бұрын
I've heard a few commentaries on this "documentary", but this one is the best so far. Informative, and a laugh a minute.
@nigelstanway491
4 жыл бұрын
Good dissection of the point Dave, we have a current trend in society towards veganism and the documentary fuels that trend. Personally I think the environmental detriment of mass livestock farming is the best reason to eat less processed meat but it doesn't mean its not healthy. A well researched and diet is always better, avoid trends!
@TAL20013
4 жыл бұрын
What if you are allergic to any soy products and also a lot of vegetable proteins? and have a seed and nut allergy? Can you still be vegan? You also do a very active job so you need to eat a substantial amount that's within 3 meals a day? What can I eat? Looking at around 3,500 calories per day? Absolutely no animal products?
@theaustralianhulk
Жыл бұрын
I see a recurrence of the low fat trend that backfired and resulted in the obesity epidemic. Could we be looking back in 20 years asking ourselves how we all went vegan but are even fatter than ever?
@lewistaylor2858
4 жыл бұрын
Gladiators were celebrities and prized assets, fighting to the death was really rare, why would you want to lose money every fight?
@Meathead-10810
Жыл бұрын
lol at the quote "Have you ever seen an Ox eating meat". I wondered whether the plant based eaters noticed how fat those oxen are, I have because I love eating fatty meat but I bet the plant based eaters do not equate those plants with the fat that an Ox has accumulated.
@davidpleydell3522
4 жыл бұрын
For any vegans out there trying to "get it right", here's a review of vegan diets for athletes published two years ago in the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition jissn.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12970-017-0192-9?sf114327445=1
@Toahmisae
4 жыл бұрын
Great video. Two questions, if by any chance you read this: Doesn't your final reference show that two thirds of those youtubers are still vegan? I haven't checked all the channels in the list, so I don't know if any of the 'still vegans' have any related health problems, but it does come across as anecdotal at best and cherry-picked at worst. Also, the source contains this peculiar bit of logic: "Note: I will count premature death (before age 60) as failure." Is there any scientific research on how long people generally stick to a vegan diet? Secondly, what books on sports and nutrition would you recommend to other climbers?
@robertyoung3960
4 жыл бұрын
Great analysis! What are the diets for Adam Ondra and Alex Honnold. When I watch their videos it appears that they are mostly vegetarian.
@FerAdventures
4 жыл бұрын
Mostly vegetarian is not the same as vegetarian. This is Adam Ondras' diet: "Diet is important. I don’t feel like my diet is very special, but I suppose some people would think that it is. The most important thing is how I eat during the time when I’m training hard. Right now I’m climbing outdoors, and in comparison I don’t climb as much. So diet is still important, but less so. I try to eat as much natural food as possible. For breakfast I have porridge or a smoothie. Throughout the day I eat only fruit, nuts, and seeds, as well as some vegetables and good spices like turmeric, curry, and cumin mixed with rice, buckwheat, or millet. In the evening I have some protein. It can be meat, eggs, lentils, or legumes. I don’t eat that much meat. I find that if I eat too much meat I’m not as strong. But at the same time if I go two weeks without any meat-I also feel weak. So I eat meat once or twice a week." www.climbing.com/people/adam-ondra-the-future-of-climbing/
@ebifurai415
4 жыл бұрын
dave do you think the protein quality of something like eggs is as good as something like chicken or red meat? in terms of how the body uses it to rebuild after a training session.
@muumarlin1731
Жыл бұрын
Dave - you are a treasure. Thank you for this analysis - truly, it's very helpful!
@davidisherwood8586
4 жыл бұрын
Really glad you decided to go through this scientifically. Its nice to see a clear view on diet science.
@MrDziuka
4 жыл бұрын
Thumbs up Dave, spot on. But I still love pasta with tomato sauce and feel satisfied and healthy after eating eat.
@Will-kt5jk
2 ай бұрын
My question is: Why don’t food labels for protein include both bioavailability rating and amino acid breakdown? I’ve seen so many “sport/fitness nutrition” products that don’t even mention the amino acid breakdown (both animal & plant sources). (while they’re at it, the fibre and non-sugar carb breakdowns would be useful too)
@climbermacleod
2 ай бұрын
That is an easy one! Because packaged foods are optimised for profit, not for your benefit. Packaging is specifically designed to obscure or mislead if it suits the manufacturer to do so.
@PaulSagar1986
4 жыл бұрын
Great video Dave - the only thing I'd add is that the most obvious physiological adaptation we have for eating omnivorous diets is our teeth! Those canine incisors evolved to enable us to tear into something, and it wasn't mangos!
@HopyHop1
2 ай бұрын
@32:59 "Arnold Schwarzenegger built his athletic career on a meat diet" My guess is that if he wasn't using massive amounts of exogenous anabolics we wouldn't have heard of him. Only a fool would believe he could have a body like prime Arnold's by eating animals and lifting weights without steroids.
@mravilious
4 жыл бұрын
Hi Dave, I've thoroughly researched the studies you referenced and have prepared a response which I would like to email to you if that's ok? I have written it up in a detailed document, with links to all the evidence - it would be too lengthy to post on here. However to summarise my findings, the documents you reference are funded by meat and/or dairy industries. This is fairly easy to establish by searching for funding sources for the studies or the authors who worked on them. For example the very 1st article you reference which allegedly shows that there is no evidence of harm from eating red or processed meat, is written by a small group of 'scientists' who founded an institute (NitriRECS) which is heavily funded by the beef industry. If you look it up online you will see various articles explaining that it is known to be inaccurate, and clearly there is a major conflict of interest. My understanding is that the link between red meat and processed meat and cancers has been well proven by several meta-studies, so it is highly likely that any individual study which suggests the opposite has a motivation to do so... You mention at one point “I also hope they have more scientific rigour generally…” (referring to the makers of game changers), please - I would urge you to heed your own advice before posting videos on nutrition which are presented as factually accurate and well evidenced. Every document you have referenced has received funding by meat and/or dairy industries, who have an obvious agenda - to keep people buying their products. They achieve this by funding researchers willing to run tests which will produce results which cast doubt on the body of (real) scientific evidence. This is done in order to create confusion amongst consumers - a well know tactic which was pioneered by the cigarette industry. This approach is very effective, because a confused consumer won't change their beliefs or their behaviour. You may not want to believe this is happening - because that would mean facing the possibility that you have been lied to, or that your beliefs have been manipulated... however I believe the evidence for this type of manipulation by these industries is pretty strong. By regurgitating heavily biased studies produced by the meat & dairy industries, without checking its validity, you are inadvertently supporting the handful of corrupt institutes that produced these studies. The end result of this is that more people will remain poorly mis-informed, and therefore will continue to eat red and processed meats, both of which carry increased risk of cancer and are proven to cause more environmental damage than other foods. By all means keep eating meat & dairy, question the science behind plant based diets, and dislike pro-vegan films if you want to! All I am asking is that you please check the source of funding, and the credibility of studies before you present these documents in videos to a wide audience as if they are concrete evidence! I'm more than happy to send you the document I produced - I spend the best part of a day working on it, and hope you are open to discussing this topic as I think it's really important. You can contact me at mravilious_AT_hotmail.com
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
Feel free to share your findings. Please post here in sections if it is too long, or on a blog or something and post the link, so that everyone can see it, rather than sending it privately. I am well aware who funds the studies. The review by Johnston and colleagues was not funded by industry. I am well aware of the past funding of a few of the authors and this is not relevant for the following reason. I have no interest in the opinion of the authors of the review - I am only interested in reading the actual data. If you are suggesting that there has been scientific data fraud in the individual studies cited in the reviews I referenced, please provide evidence. I am assuming that data has not been fabricated. I'm well aware of the role of bias in the authors interpretation and for this reason I, and anyone else who knows how to read a paper, pays attention to the actual data and make their own interpretation. I used that particular reference not because I trust the authors interpretation (I don't ). But rather because I agree with it based on the raw data. A key distinction. If you can show me any evidence of harm from eating meat, Im all ears.
@mravilious
4 жыл бұрын
@@climbermacleod Good to hear you are open to evidence which demonstrates the health risks. I've detailed some in my response: docs.google.com/presentation/d/1DS658jNRC4_GRR5BBpDOa_FmHh27J7-zx_cGR2lEFEU/edit?usp=sharing
@mravilious
4 жыл бұрын
kzitem.info/news/bejne/sGiEqIClcaGne3Y
@mravilious
3 жыл бұрын
I assume that you didn't read any of the info I sent in the presentation I uploaded in response Dave? It's one thing to say your open to rational review of information/evidence, and another to put that into practice.
@orangeblade2
4 жыл бұрын
Great video Dave thankyou. Can I echo others by saying you should definitely consider writing a book about diet, perhaps with climbing as a background. I've been using Huel as 75% of my diet for over four years, so largely vegan. The pro vegan marketing is starting to bite as my partner and I are subconsciously shifting to vegan or veggie options for regular meals. Maybe mealworms are the answer....
@redhotwalls757
4 жыл бұрын
Dave, I respect your work so much. You zero bs approach and matter of fact style takes into account bad science and gives a really well balanced view. You have a talent and a very level head. I love that your proof of the pudding is so clear, you've climbed hard shit in every category! So I've got a question I'd really be incredibly grateful if you would answer and I'm sorry that some of this information is probably in your videos somewhere. I've recently gone on a low carb diet. In some ways, I feel amazing. It seems to have had a profoundly positive affect on my depression and anxiety and am so glad I'm doing it. And I've lost so much weight. However, I have the keto flu soooo bad! After 2.5 weeks still! Did you experience this and is it worth pushing through for?
@climbermacleod
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks. Yes I experienced keto flu and once it had passed I felt good. It is really worth experimenting with your electrolytes to see if adding more calcium, magnesium, potassium and/or sodium helps with symptoms. Mine disappeared instantly after adding extra salt and magnesium.
@danielcurtiss6639
4 жыл бұрын
This is gold. Thank you, Dave!
@nematoaddd
4 жыл бұрын
Is it though?
@jaredtyerman
4 жыл бұрын
Great video Dave. At roughly 28:00; however, you said humans have the largest brain in the amimal kingdom. This is incorrect, we have the largest brain to body ratio (encephalization). Many whale and dolphins species, as well as some remaining terrestrial mega fauna, have brains exceeding the weight and size of human's. Just as an FYI :). Keep up the awesome videos!
Пікірлер: 767