Eating Steak and Lean Ground Beef Everday

[ToHot2Handle]

can eating steak and lean ground beef actually be bad for your health, i read online that all that saturated fat is hard for your body to break down and that you store lots of red meat in your intestines, so should you only eat it a few times a week? or was that all bs?

 

[Steakeater**]

Eat the steak. Just make sure that saturated fat is not your only fat intake.

There were some cases of ground meat not being all pure, but its fine, eat it too.

 

[Rowan11088]

You store lots of everything in your intestines. Then you poop it out the next day. Don't worry about it.

 

[canadapride**]

You store lots of everything in your intestines. Then you poop it out the next day. Don't worry about it.

lol LMAO!!!!!!!!q

 

[Rowan11088]

lol LMAO!!!!!!!!q

Drinking this evening?

I'm completely sober and I don't see it.

 

[bobbyhated]

i gave up red meat and i feel alot better for it. everytime i tried to cheat and eat some, i got sick to my stomache. the human body is just not designed for digesting beef products.

its very true that the garbage from it builds up in your instestinal tract and it has so much saturated fat you might as well be eating butter by the bar. and your digestive tract just doesnt break it down like it does chicken and fish. not to mention, chicken and fish have more grams of protein per weight.

of course most people have no idea whats going on in their own bodies. they cant feel their own indigestion and if they do, arent smart enough to connect it to what theyre eating. which is why americans in particular consume so much red meat, sugar, salt, etc and have such a high incidence of obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease, etc.

an easy test to see if your diet is clean or not is to look at your shit. if its loose and/or dark in color you are eating dirty. if its solid and light in color, you are eating clean.

stupid people get what they deserve.

 

[JSN]

 

[KLudwig64]

lmao hilarious but kinda creepy.

 

[Forsaken]

the human body is just not designed for digesting beef products.

its very true that the garbage from it builds up in your instestinal tract and it has so much saturated fat you might as well be eating butter by the bar. and your digestive tract just doesnt break it down like it does chicken and fish. not to mention, chicken and fish have more grams of protein per weight.

Source?

 

[Trollgrappler]

With the hormones and steroids in the meat if you eat red meat every day you are sure to get heart disease or cancer later in life. So ya good luck with that. Eat Chicken and fish i have cut red meat out of my diet completely.

 

[johnnyxbl4ze]

1234

 

[MikeMartial]

i gave up red meat and i feel alot better for it. everytime i tried to cheat and eat some, i got sick to my stomache. the human body is just not designed for digesting beef products.

Really? Huh. That seems not to jive with about 5 million years of human evolution.

its very true that the garbage from it builds up in your instestinal tract and it has so much saturated fat you might as well be eating butter by the bar.

Mmm! Butter by the bar sounds awesome. While I'm heading down to the farmer's market to buy more organic free range butter, he's some light reading on saturated fat for you:

Animal Pharm: Benefits of High-Saturated Fat Diets (Part I)

Animal Pharm: Benefits of High-Saturated Fat Diets (Part II): Centenarians, CETP, TYP Diet Part 3

Animal Pharm: Benefits of High-Saturated Fat Diets (Part III): My Paleo Peeps With High HDLs

Animal Pharm: Benefits of High-Saturated Fat Diets (Part IV): REGRESSION IN HEART PATIENTS

Animal Pharm: Benefits of High-Saturated Fat Diets (Part V): The Traditional Okinawans

Once you've wrapped you're celery-stick eating mind around those pages, or if you can't, here's a nicely condensed quote from Stephen at Whole Health Source

The diet-heart hypothesis, the idea that dietary saturated fat and cholesterol raise blood cholesterol and thus increase heart attack risk, is a half-century embarrassment to the international scientific community. It requires willful ignorance of the fact that saturated fat does not increase total cholesterol or LDL in humans, in the long term. It requires a simplistic view of blood lipids that ignores the potentially harmful effects of replacing animal fats with carbohydrate or industrial seed oils.

and your digestive tract just doesnt break it down like it does chicken and fish. not to mention, chicken and fish have more grams of protein per weight.

"doesn't break it down"? So are you trying to tell me there's a difference in the TYPE of proteins between chicken, beef, and fish? A 2.5 second check of Nutrition Data shows 100g of chicken at 23g pro, and 21g for beef. And totally off topic, but fish has more fat per g than both chicken and beef.

of course most people have no idea whats going on in their own bodies.

Well, I know of at least one person that I'm pretty sure of that has no clue.

which is why americans in particular consume so much red meat, sugar, salt, etc and have such a high incidence of obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease, etc.

Red meat has nothing to do with rates of obesity, nor does salt. Sugar, on the other hand has everything to do with it. You've had the dogmatic wool pulled over your eyes by conventional wisdom, and I'd also hazard a guess, a hefty dose of vegetarian propaganda.

an easy test to see if your diet is clean or not is to look at your shit. if its loose and/or dark in color you are eating dirty. if its solid and light in color, you are eating clean.

While I agree an aspect of bowel health can be gauged on stool examination, you're qualities are far too vague to have any value. "Clean" and "Dirty" are subjective terms. Both Chek and Poliquin have done helluva lot more research in this area than you, trust me:

"The average human being should pass about twelve inches of well-formed, not foul smelling, fluffy, easy to pass, light brown, earthy-smelling stool per day, if you've got a normal bowel.
You can poop three four-inchers, two six-inchers, or one great big one; it doesn't really matter. You should have a minimum of one really healthy bowel movement a day."

And both recommend beef and saturated fat in the diets of the athletes they train.

stupid people get what they deserve.

This is one point I 100% completely agree with. If you do not want to be one of these people, I suggest getting educated before spouting garbage on a nutritional forum dedicated to high standards of accuracy and intelligence.

 

[anaconda]

i gave up red meat and i feel alot better for it. everytime i tried to cheat and eat some, i got sick to my stomache. the human body is just not designed for digesting beef products.

its very true that the garbage from it builds up in your instestinal tract and it has so much saturated fat you might as well be eating butter by the bar. and your digestive tract just doesnt break it down like it does chicken and fish. not to mention, chicken and fish have more grams of protein per weight.

of course most people have no idea whats going on in their own bodies. they cant feel their own indigestion and if they do, arent smart enough to connect it to what theyre eating. which is why americans in particular consume so much red meat, sugar, salt, etc and have such a high incidence of obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease, etc.

an easy test to see if your diet is clean or not is to look at your shit. if its loose and/or dark in color you are eating dirty. if its solid and light in color, you are eating clean.

stupid people get what they deserve.

With the hormones and steroids in the meat if you eat red meat every day you are sure to get heart disease or cancer later in life. So ya good luck with that. Eat Chicken and fish i have cut red meat out of my diet completely.

Damn, where have you guys been? I am so happy you are here now. Seriously, I think together you have just saved my life. Thank you!

 

[Trollgrappler]

MikeMartial if you like red meat then i'd expect you to defend it because you enjoy it so you will go to any length to justify that it is good for you.

There is no reason to eat red meat it serve no purpose that Chicken and fish couldn't fulfill. It is common knowledge that red meat causes heart disease and plenty of new studies that say it causes cancer.

BBC NEWS | Health | Red meat 'cancer threat'

Eating red meat introduces a potentially dangerous molecule into the body tissues, according to researchers.

Scientists from the University of California in San Diego believe it could cause heart disease and cancer by triggering a harmful immune response.

Humans cannot produce the molecule - a type of sugar - but it occurs at high levels in lamb, pork and beef.

The research is published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

I understand you enjoy it but i can't let you steer people wrong when a person doesn't need red meat and the only thing it can do in the end is harm you.

 

[anaconda]

this is one point i 100% completely agree with. If you do not want to be one of these people, i suggest getting educated before spouting garbage on a nutritional forum dedicated to high standards of accuracy and intelligence.

+1.

 

[anaconda]

MikeMartial if you like red meat then i'd expect you to defend it because you enjoy it so you will go to any length to justify that it is good for you.

There is no reason to eat red meat it serve no purpose that Chicken and fish couldn't fulfill. It is common knowledge that red meat causes heart disease and plenty of new studies that say it causes cancer.

BBC NEWS | Health | Red meat 'cancer threat'



I understand you enjoy it but i can't let you steer people wrong when a person doesn't need red meat and the only thing it can do in the end is harm you.

Did you read anything mike posted? Or did you just do a google search for "red meat cancer" and post the first link you found?

You "can't let [him] steer people wrong?" Who the fuck are you? You have absolutely no clue about what you are saying. Red meat is not inherently bad for you. Its meat. Its quality animal flesh. We have been eating it for thousands and thousands of years. But somehow you think that it can't do any good? "The only thing it can do in the end is harm you." LOL!

Go read a book or two.

 

[MikeMartial]

MikeMartial if you like red meat then i'd expect you to defend it because you enjoy it so you will go to any length to justify that it is good for you.

There is no reason to eat red meat it serve no purpose that Chicken and fish couldn't fulfill. It is common knowledge that red meat causes heart disease and plenty of new studies that say it causes cancer.

BBC NEWS | Health | Red meat 'cancer threat'



I understand you enjoy it but i can't let you steer people wrong when a person doesn't need red meat and the only thing it can do in the end is harm you.

LOL. If you're going to quote something, maybe a reliable source would be needed? Like, say, perhaps, the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition?

Meat, eggs, dairy products, and risk of breast cancer in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort1,2,3


Background: A Western diet is associated with breast cancer risk. Objective: We investigated the relation of meat, egg, and dairy product consumption with breast cancer risk by using data from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC).
Design: Between 1992 and 2003, information on diet was collected from 319,826 women. Disease hazard ratios were estimated with multivariate Cox proportional hazard models.
Results: Breast cancer cases (n = 7119) were observed during 8.8 y (median) of follow-up. No consistent association was found between breast cancer risk and the consumption of any of the food groups under study, when analyzed by both categorical and continuous exposure variable models. High processed meat consumption was associated with a modest increase in breast cancer risk in the categorical model (hazard ratio: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.20; highest compared with lowest quintile: P for trend = 0.07). Subgroup analyses suggested an association with butter consumption, limited to premenopausal women (hazard ratio: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.53; highest compared with lowest quintile: P for trend = 0.21). Between-country heterogeneity was found for red meat (Q statistic = 18.03; P = 0.05) and was significantly explained (P = 0.023) by the proportion of meat cooked at high temperature.
Conclusions: We have not consistently identified intakes of meat, eggs, or dairy products as risk factors for breast cancer. Future studies should investigate the possible role of high-temperature cooking in the relation of red meat intake with breast cancer risk.

Now this could go back and forth, depending on how deep one wants to dig for the studies they "want" to find. We could get into ROS, oxidation from heat, etc etc. but I find it very humorous that you want to demonize red meat, yet recommend chicken.

Edit: I'm having Cory Pilford flashbacks. Anyone else?

 

[johnnyxbl4ze]

1234

 

[Trollgrappler]

Did you read anything mike posted? Or did you just do a google search for "red meat cancer" and post the first link you found?

Its all good man eat what you want. I am just stating what i know. Its up to each person what they do. I posted the BBC link because its a reputable study. If you are saying the National Academy of Science doesn't know anything then there is no convincing you. In the end you do what you want but don't be surprised if you are fucked medically in your 60's.

 

[johnnyxbl4ze]

1234