Joe Rogan is doing Carnivore Diet and said he has bad Diarrhea from it but will continue on

Salt is salt

If you have a good source showing Himalayan salt is better for you and or good for you please post it




https//www.pritikin.com/is-himalayan-salt-healthy

Both the American Heart Association and the Pritikin Longevity Center recommend that nearly all Americans consume no more than 1,500 milligrams of sodium per day. It doesn’t really matter whether that sodium comes largely from plain old iodized table salt or from pricey Himalayan sea salt. If you exceed that 1,500-milligram daily level of sodium, it is likely to contribute to:

  • Elevated blood pressure
  • Kidney stone formation
  • Osteoporosis
  • Atrophic gastritis (chronic inflammation of the stomach’s lining)
  • Acid reflux
  • Headaches
  • Senility
  • Strokes
  • Heart attacks
  • Heart failure
  • Kidney failure

Natural salt has 80+ minerals and elements in their proper ratios

Table salt is sodium chloride with some iodine added

Massive difference.

Theres many examples of refining products and isolating molecules which are far less optimal than the original version. You can even look to drugs for that one
 
As you age it'll fuck you up , cholesterol is a thing .

There is a reason we turned to farming , hunting is hard and unreliable
If that's the case, youd have seen heart disease rampant among early hunter gatherers but the data shows they were healthier, had more dense bone structures and were physically superior to us in many ways.

But I agree. Agriculture is an amazing thing.
 
Natural salt has 80+ minerals and elements in their proper ratios

Table salt is sodium chloride with some iodine added

Massive difference.

Theres many examples of refining products and isolating molecules which are far less optimal than the original version. You can even look to drugs for that one
You are still getting the sodium which we need to minimize.
 
You are still getting the sodium which we need to minimize.
When you have all the minerals and elements in their appropriate ratios, it doesnt appear to create any cause for concern. We have a long history with salt. Wars were fought over salt. People used to be paid a salary in salt. All these issues related to sodium are a modern thing. If you go back any length of time In history they didn't exist

We also didn't isolate sodium either. Which is no different a process than extracting cocaine from coca leaf.
 
I sort of get diarrhea too if I eat too much meat, it's not explosive like Joe's but it's not normal poo either. I always thought it had to do with the amount of fat I ate, and I guess the lack of fiber isn't helping him. He should take phylum husks, it should help. Or better yet, just stop this experiment all together. It doesn't sound healthy.
 
It is unaltered and has all the natural minerals and elements in their appropriate balance

Theres a massive difference

For someone who reads about health you should know this
What about this :

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/pink-himalayan-salt#section4
himalayan salt table salt
Calcium (mg) 1.6 0.4
Potassium (mg) 2.8 0.9
Magnesium (mg 1.06 0.0139
Iron (mg) 0.0369 0.0101
Sodium (mg) 368 381

As you can see, table salt may have more sodium, but pink Himalayan salt contains more calcium, potassium, magnesium and iron (6).

Nevertheless, the amounts of these minerals in pink Himalayan salt are very, very small.

They are found in such small quantities that it would take 3.7 pounds (1.7 kg) of pink Himalayan salt to obtain the recommended daily amount of potassium, for instance. Needless to say, that's an unrealistic amount of salt to consume.

For the most part, the extra minerals in pink Himalayan salt are found in such small quantities that they are unlikely to provide you with any health benefits whatsoever.
 
If that's the case, youd have seen heart disease rampant among early hunter gatherers but the data shows they were healthier, had more dense bone structures and were physically superior to us in many ways.

But I agree. Agriculture is an amazing thing.
Not if they still got a large part if not the bulk of their calories from the gathering part of the hunter gatherer equation which is likely

https://www.ancient.eu/article/1311/norse-viking-diet/

"While the people of Scandinavia certainly ate meat, it was not a central part of their diet as they seem to have relied more on dairy products, fruits, and vegetables. "

If we look at the health outcomes of a society that did eat a primarily meat diet we see heart disease stroke and a short lifespan :

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/eskimo-myth_b_5268420
In fact, data collected over many decades showed that coronary artery disease is common in Greenland's Inuit population. Heart disease is as frequent -- or even more so -- among native northern populations as it is for other populations. Strokes are particularly common, and life expectancy overall was found to be about a decade shorter among native populations.
 
When you have all the minerals and elements in their appropriate ratios, it doesnt appear to create any cause for concern. We have a long history with salt. Wars were fought over salt. People used to be paid a salary in salt. All these issues related to sodium are a modern thing. If you go back any length of time In history they didn't exist

We also didn't isolate sodium either. Which is no different a process than extracting cocaine from coca leaf.
Yes salt was fairly rare and expensive thus it was used sparingly unlike now when vast amounts are in nearly everything .
 
Rice is healthy, if it was not japanese people would be dying young and thats not happening

Lol yes rice is healthy. What clown doesn’t think rice is healthy

@Oeshon doesn't think rice is healthy.
Well we need to discern between white rice and whole grain, brown, rice but lets be real as most people are eating white rice.



logo-harvard_health-full-v2-@2x.png



Avoid these foods for a healthier heart

Highly refined and processed grains and carbohydrates
How much to eat: Preferably none, or at most 7 servings per week.

Serving size: 1 ounce.

The evidence. Many studies have linked whole grain intake — in place of starches (like potatoes) and refined carbohydrates (like white bread, white rice, and low-fiber breakfast cereals) — to a lower risk of heart disease, diabetes, and possibly stroke. Whole grains are also linked to lower weight gain over time. This makes sense, considering that whole grains lower blood pressure and cholesterol, and may improve blood vessel function and reduce hunger.

Why it harms the heart. Refined or processed foods include white bread, white rice, low-fiber breakfast cereals, sweets and sugars, and other refined or processed carbohydrates. Why aren't these foods healthy? First, high levels of processing remove many of the most healthful components in whole grains, such as dietary fiber, minerals, phytochemicals, and fatty acids. Second, high levels of processing destroy the food's natural structure. For example, eating a food made of finely milled oats (e.g., Cheerios) or grains (e.g., typically finely milled whole-grain bread) produces much higher spikes in blood sugar than less-processed versions such as steel-cut oats or stone-ground bread. Third, processing often adds many ingredients that are less healthy, particularly trans fats, sodium, and sugars. Fourth, some research shows that fructose is metabolized differently than other sugars, in a way that increases the liver's production of new fat. Fructose represents about half of the sugar in sweeteners like high-fructose corn syrup or sucrose (found in cane sugar and beet sugar). That's not to suggest that you never eat a slice of pie or white bread — just make them an occasional treat rather than a regular part of your diet.
 
Not if they still got a large part if not the bulk of their calories from the gathering part of the hunter gatherer equation which is likely

https://www.ancient.eu/article/1311/norse-viking-diet/

"While the people of Scandinavia certainly ate meat, it was not a central part of their diet as they seem to have relied more on dairy products, fruits, and vegetables. "

If we look at the health outcomes of a society that did eat a primarily meat diet we see heart disease stroke and a short lifespan :

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/eskimo-myth_b_5268420
In fact, data collected over many decades showed that coronary artery disease is common in Greenland's Inuit population. Heart disease is as frequent -- or even more so -- among native northern populations as it is for other populations. Strokes are particularly common, and life expectancy overall was found to be about a decade shorter among native populations.
Problem with that data is the Inuit haven't been healthy for a long time

There used to be stories of many of their elders living to over 100 years old. If you read Weston prices book nutrition and physical degeneration, it documented the decline in their health, teeth and bone structures as they switched from their traditional diets into more western foods and sugar.

Any modern data on indigenous cultures will be very flawed. Its very rare to find a culture who's still living off the land, eating only what they find in nature and has been for a long time. They also live in one of the roughest climates on earth, their people died for a multitude of reasons that had nothing to do with diet, which is another flaw.

I was more so speaking on pre agricultural peoples. Where we were predominantly hunting and gathering. They absolutely ate whatever was available in their environments. Plants, fruits, roots, bugs, etc. But depending on the climate there would also be large stretches of time where the only food available would be hunted meat.

Our bodies have been well adapted to such a diet. Maybe not forever. We do need plants. But for periods of time and again if you look at some of the fossil records, hunter gatherers were actually far healthier than modern peoples, had far more dense bone structures, even bigger brains.
 
Not if they still got a large part if not the bulk of their calories from the gathering part of the hunter gatherer equation which is likely

https://www.ancient.eu/article/1311/norse-viking-diet/

"While the people of Scandinavia certainly ate meat, it was not a central part of their diet as they seem to have relied more on dairy products, fruits, and vegetables. "

If we look at the health outcomes of a society that did eat a primarily meat diet we see heart disease stroke and a short lifespan :

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/eskimo-myth_b_5268420
In fact, data collected over many decades showed that coronary artery disease is common in Greenland's Inuit population. Heart disease is as frequent -- or even more so -- among native northern populations as it is for other populations. Strokes are particularly common, and life expectancy overall was found to be about a decade shorter among native populations.
A lot of the data connecting animal food to heart disease seems to be misguided as well. The game has been changing for the last few years. A lot of people are still believing in what is quickly becoming some very outdated nutrition info. Disputed both by modern science and ancient data

https://www.livescience.com/48969-heart-disease-diabetes-risks-carbohydrate-saturated-fat.html

https://sustainabledish.com/new-global-study-links-carbohydrates-not-fat-heart-disease/

https://www.diabetes.co.uk/in-depth...e-states-leading-cardiologist-dr-salim-yusuf/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5793267/

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html
 
A lot of the data connecting animal food to heart disease seems to be misguided as well. The game has been changing for the last few years. A lot of people are still believing in what is quickly becoming some very outdated nutrition info. Disputed both by modern science and ancient data

https://www.livescience.com/48969-heart-disease-diabetes-risks-carbohydrate-saturated-fat.html

https://sustainabledish.com/new-global-study-links-carbohydrates-not-fat-heart-disease/

https://www.diabetes.co.uk/in-depth...e-states-leading-cardiologist-dr-salim-yusuf/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5793267/

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html
Let's look at your first link ( I'm not driving into all of them , just went with the 1st one )

First off the study was paid for by the Dairy Research Institute, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, the Egg Nutrition Center, and the Robert C. and Veronica Atkins Foundation, that's a major red flag

Second it was a small short study following obese people , it's a classic example of setting up a study to achieve the desired result.

"As the chair of Harvard’s nutrition department put it " their conclusions regarding the type of fat being unimportant are seriously misleading and should be disregarded, going as far as suggesting the paper be retracted, even after the authors corrected a half dozen different errors."

https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-saturated-fat-studies-set-up-to-fail/

Even the study you cited shows this :

The researchers found that as the amount of dietary fat was decreased, there were no changes in the levels of saturated fat in the participants' blood. But one kind of fatty acid, called palmitoleic acid, did progressively increase.


"Higher proportions of palmitoleic acid in blood or adipose tissue are consistently associated with a myriad of undesirable outcomes, such as obesity, …inflammation, metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes, coronary disease, heart failure, and incidence and aggressiveness of prostate cancer," the researchers wrote.


Cheers
 
Let's look at your first link ( I'm not driving into all of them , just went with the 1st one )

First off the study was paid for by the Dairy Research Institute, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, the Egg Nutrition Center, and the Robert C. and Veronica Atkins Foundation, that's a major red flag

Second it was a small short study following obese people , it's a classic example of setting up a study to achieve the desired result.

"As the chair of Harvard’s nutrition department put it " their conclusions regarding the type of fat being unimportant are seriously misleading and should be disregarded, going as far as suggesting the paper be retracted, even after the authors corrected a half dozen different errors."

https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-saturated-fat-studies-set-up-to-fail/

Even the study you cited shows this :

The researchers found that as the amount of dietary fat was decreased, there were no changes in the levels of saturated fat in the participants' blood. But one kind of fatty acid, called palmitoleic acid, did progressively increase.


"Higher proportions of palmitoleic acid in blood or adipose tissue are consistently associated with a myriad of undesirable outcomes, such as obesity, …inflammation, metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes, coronary disease, heart failure, and incidence and aggressiveness of prostate cancer," the researchers wrote.


Cheers
Haha i just looked up a few random ones on google to be honest

Theres always a few bad/ biased studies out there. That's on me for just posting links recklessly

But if you look Into that field of research in general, it will likely change the way you view these things. It does require a bit of digging and sifting

A few of the ones I posted are good tho
 
It is unaltered and has all the natural minerals and elements in their appropriate balance

Theres a massive difference

For someone who reads about health you should know this
I used Celtic Sea Salt, but simply for the taste, I like how it tastes on my food compared to Iodized salt, but recently some news story said you should use iodized table salt over those sea salts because there is no proof the salts you speak of have health benefits over iodized salt, the guy claims the iodine salt is better since people need iodine for thyroid function and most natural salt do not contain iodine or very little.
 
The worst advice I heard Rogan give was to CT fletcher who was pretty much dying from a weak heart and needed a transplant, he told him dont avoid salt that salt is good, he also told that to another guest that had hyper tension and high blood pressure
The world of broscience exploded when Joe Rogan and CT Fletcher shared an studio for a couple of hours.
The worst advice I heard Rogan give was to CT fletcher who was pretty much dying from a weak heart and needed a transplant, he told him dont avoid salt that salt is good, he also told that to another guest that had hyper tension and high blood pressure
The world of broscience exploded when Joe Rogan and CT Fletcher shared an studio for a couple of hours. I love specially when CT claims he has always been natural LOL.
 
Well we need to discern between white rice and whole grain, brown, rice but lets be real as most people are eating white rice.



logo-harvard_health-full-v2-@2x.png



Avoid these foods for a healthier heart

Highly refined and processed grains and carbohydrates
How much to eat: Preferably none, or at most 7 servings per week.

Serving size: 1 ounce.

The evidence. Many studies have linked whole grain intake — in place of starches (like potatoes) and refined carbohydrates (like white bread, white rice, and low-fiber breakfast cereals) — to a lower risk of heart disease, diabetes, and possibly stroke. Whole grains are also linked to lower weight gain over time. This makes sense, considering that whole grains lower blood pressure and cholesterol, and may improve blood vessel function and reduce hunger.

Why it harms the heart. Refined or processed foods include white bread, white rice, low-fiber breakfast cereals, sweets and sugars, and other refined or processed carbohydrates. Why aren't these foods healthy? First, high levels of processing remove many of the most healthful components in whole grains, such as dietary fiber, minerals, phytochemicals, and fatty acids. Second, high levels of processing destroy the food's natural structure. For example, eating a food made of finely milled oats (e.g., Cheerios) or grains (e.g., typically finely milled whole-grain bread) produces much higher spikes in blood sugar than less-processed versions such as steel-cut oats or stone-ground bread. Third, processing often adds many ingredients that are less healthy, particularly trans fats, sodium, and sugars. Fourth, some research shows that fructose is metabolized differently than other sugars, in a way that increases the liver's production of new fat. Fructose represents about half of the sugar in sweeteners like high-fructose corn syrup or sucrose (found in cane sugar and beet sugar). That's not to suggest that you never eat a slice of pie or white bread — just make them an occasional treat rather than a regular part of your diet.
So wild long grain rice is better? man that fluffy white rice is so good though when you eat it with steak or salmon it goes well in terms of taste.

Ill be honest with you Ive never really tried wild long grain rice looks good though is it hard to cook? can I cook it in my rice cooker or do I have to do it by pan?
Mushrooms-long-grain-wild-rice-add-a-pinch-cropped.jpg
 
Back
Top