Plant based diets for BJJ athletes?

[winterbike]

Meat is good guys, but we don't need anywhere NEAR the amount that most humans consume, let alone Americans. Nor do we need nearly as much grains as we get. Humans are supposed to get more of their calories off fruit, nuts, vegatation, which means less saturated fat, less cholesterol, and more fiber and nutrients and energy food. We came from apes after all.

You know the closest species to us were Neanderthals (bloodthirsty apex predators) right?

 

[Scissor Sweep]

I was vegan for six years, and ate pretty healthy, but I was perpetually weak and skinny. I went from 5'4" 118lbs to 147lbs now and most people would still say I am skinny or at least thin, but I'm much stronger than before.

I used to try to gain weight by working out and eating high carbs, high natural fats, but I couldn't.

I eat meat every day. Some people can be vegan and be top level athletes, and some can't. It depends on their bodies and genetics.

Tim Bradley is a mean looking vegan OP left off the list.

 

[marian]

How do you know for sure? Have you tried adding quality meats to your current diet & found that it negatively affected your performance? Basically your argument for why you eat vegan/vegetarian is: 1.) I've done it for a long time and it's worked for me. 2.) I recover faster than my peers who eat meat. 3.) I have good blood work numbers.

1 & 3 are great, but don't take into account that a diet with meat in it could actually further increase performance.

You're right, I don't know for sure, but I'm vegan/vegetarian for moral/ethical reasons first. It's ok, you can go ahead & heckle me because I love animals. Sheeeeet, even my pops still heckles me about the fact I don't eat meat even after all these years. IDGAF.

Bearing that in mind, even if I could eek out a small percentage of performance gain via animal flesh (which I personally doubt would be possible), I couldn't do it based on my moral/ethical convictions. Besides, I'm not going to be a world champion or nothing and I'll get waaaaay more performance gains out of getting more sleep, getting more mat time, drinking less beer, and eating less donuts than from adding animal flesh to my diet.

But, aside from the moral/ethical reasons, I also do believe that eating less flesh and less animal products is healthier for most people. Much of this is due to the state of factory farming in Westernized nations and the abuse of hormones and antibiotics in factory farming. But, even aside from this, I still have a whole litany of reasons why I believe that most people would benefit from adding more plants to their diet and reducing their reliance on animal products.

However, this is one of the things I don't really like about these discussions: I'm not trying to convert anyone (and likewise, I'm not trying to be converted). I've done a ton of reading and have educated myself about the choices that I make but I do keep an open mind. (e.g. I do sometimes think maybe I should add fish to my diet for the fatty acids but I always hated the taste of fish so I don't see any reason to force myself to eat something I know I don't like and that also conflicts with my morals/ethics).

I do think people should educate themselves more about the choices that they make. And by "educate themselves" I mean peer-reviewed journals & similarly science-based texts rather than "Men's Health", youtube quacks, and internet diet fads. Furthermore, it's important to try to figure out who/what organization may be funding research and driving current research trends. I think there's some insight in the saying that you should eat food that isn't seen on TV or magazine advertisements.

2 is subjective and anecdotal. Your increased recovery might be due to a number of factors such as genetic differences, or better diet.

Oh, no doubt. I'm sure a lot of it has to do with years of training in other sports before I started bjj and because I have learned some great tricks how to recover more quickly (both between intervals or rounds as well as between training sessions) but part of it is also due to the fact that most of the food I eat is pretty easily digested by my body and so more of my body's energy can go towards recovery & repair instead of digestion.

By removing meat from a diet you're taking away a valuable tool which, among other things, is great for gaining or maintaining lean muscle mass.

If there's one thing I am pretty sure is not a problem for me, it's gaining and maintaining lean muscle mass, so much so that when I switched from rowing to cycling years ago I had a beast of a time for a while as I was carrying around waaaaaaay more upper body musculature than most of my competitors were.

To close, it seems like your diet has worked for you and given you a good deal of success. That's great and I don't want to take away from that or to even imply that a vegan/vegetarian diet is wrong.

Thanks, really. You've been reasonable and respectful of my points even though you disagree or have questions about some of them.

My point is that a diet without quality meats is not optimal.

But, I suppose we'll just have to agree to respectfully disagree on this point.

 

[DPS831]

You're right, I don't know for sure, but I'm vegan/vegetarian for moral/ethical reasons first. It's ok, you can go ahead & heckle me because I love animals. Sheeeeet, even my pops still heckles me about the fact I don't eat meat even after all these years. IDGAF.

Bearing that in mind, even if I could eek out a small percentage of performance gain via animal flesh (which I personally doubt would be possible), I couldn't do it based on my moral/ethical convictions. Besides, I'm not going to be a world champion or nothing and I'll get waaaaay more performance gains out of getting more sleep, getting more mat time, drinking less beer, and eating less donuts than from adding animal flesh to my diet.

But, aside from the moral/ethical reasons, I also do believe that eating less flesh and less animal products is healthier for most people. Much of this is due to the state of factory farming in Westernized nations and the abuse of hormones and antibiotics in factory farming. But, even aside from this, I still have a whole litany of reasons why I believe that most people would benefit from adding more plants to their diet and reducing their reliance on animal products.

However, this is one of the things I don't really like about these discussions: I'm not trying to convert anyone (and likewise, I'm not trying to be converted). I've done a ton of reading and have educated myself about the choices that I make but I do keep an open mind. (e.g. I do sometimes think maybe I should add fish to my diet for the fatty acids but I always hated the taste of fish so I don't see any reason to force myself to eat something I know I don't like and that also conflicts with my morals/ethics).

I do think people should educate themselves more about the choices that they make. And by "educate themselves" I mean peer-reviewed journals & similarly science-based texts rather than "Men's Health", youtube quacks, and internet diet fads. Furthermore, it's important to try to figure out who/what organization may be funding research and driving current research trends. I think there's some insight in the saying that you should eat food that isn't seen on TV or magazine advertisements.


Oh, no doubt. I'm sure a lot of it has to do with years of training in other sports before I started bjj and because I have learned some great tricks how to recover more quickly (both between intervals or rounds as well as between training sessions) but part of it is also due to the fact that most of the food I eat is pretty easily digested by my body and so more of my body's energy can go towards recovery & repair instead of digestion.


If there's one thing I am pretty sure is not a problem for me, it's gaining and maintaining lean muscle mass, so much so that when I switched from rowing to cycling years ago I had a beast of a time for a while as I was carrying around waaaaaaay more upper body musculature than most of my competitors were.


Thanks, really. You've been reasonable and respectful of my points even though you disagree or have questions about some of them.


But, I suppose we'll just have to agree to respectfully disagree on this point.

Hey, fair enough, and if it's for ethical reasons I totally respect it. I guess my gripe is with the conventional "wisdom" nowadays that seems to make a vegan/vegetarian diet out to be the epitome of good nutrition. Seems like you've put in the time to make an informed decision about your diet, and it's working out. Party on.

 

[marian]

 

[Cachimbo]

I do it, and I'm very healthy, and actually gained muscle mass. I feel much better than I did before (no more heartburn, no more overeating, etc.) Additionally, I'm not exposed to the hormones and antibiotics that come with meat. It's very easy to do, especially if you like to cook (which I love).

I started for ethical reasons - don't like to kill things and cause mass amounts of pollution, but it did have a positive impact on my health. Even though I love love love meat, it was not that hard to stop. Within two or so weeks I no longer really missed meat, but rather craved it like you crave chocolate or something.

I recommend giving it a try. It's also been much easier on my pocket.

 

[Vitamin C]

We didn't come from apes, because we ARE apes.

Jesus people.

The great apes include Pan (chimpanzees & bonobos), Gorilla (gorillas), Pongo (orangutans) and Homo (us).

We are an ape. Deal with it.

 

[Coolnickname]

We didn't come from apes, because we ARE apes.

Jesus people.

The great apes include Pan (chimpanzees & bonobos), Gorilla (gorillas), Pongo (orangutans) and Homo (us).

We are an ape. Deal with it.

You calling me a homo bro?!

 

[Nozza]

We didn't come from apes, because we ARE apes.

Jesus people.

The great apes include Pan (chimpanzees & bonobos), Gorilla (gorillas), Pongo (orangutans) and Homo (us).

We are an ape. Deal with it.

It's not quite that simple. What the term "ape" covers depends on who's using it. E.g. from Wikipedia: "Biologists have used the term "ape" to mean a member of the superfamily Hominoidea other than humans"

Here is a discussion which touches on the ins and outs of the taxonomy: http://evolvingthoughts.net/2012/03/are-humans-apes-monkeys-primates-or-hominims/

Anyway, semantics aside, the point was that just because we and other hominids evolved from a common ancestor does not mean we should all eat the same food any more it means than humans should live in trees. We are a different animal that has evolved divergently. We should eat human food not ape food. In fact even different apes around today have differing diets.

Saying that people should eat what (we assume) paleolithic man ate is fraught with enough problems yet alone taking it even further back 10 millions years or so.

 

[ajf]

Ugh, not this again.

I was vegan for 18 years. Over the last year I reintroduced hormone free, organic, and preferably farm-fresh dairy into my diet. I don't feel any different. I gained a couple of pounds of what I think is muscle, and I eat better breakfasts than I did before.

Most people were shocked when they found out I was vegan. There tends to be a certain body image associated with vegetarianism and veganism, based primarily upon the fact that there's not a huge number of athletes that won't eat meat/dairy.

It's stupid to argue about diet. I never pushed my choose of food on anyone else and I don't think anyone needs to push theirs on me. Anyone with a reasonable knowledge of nutrition also knows that there's a huge variance of hereditary health factors involved in dietary selection. Try telling someone with high cholesterol to eat paleo or someone with a wheat allergy to eat vegan...

 

[Vitamin C]

It's not quite that simple. What the term "ape" covers depends on who's using it. E.g. from Wikipedia: "Biologists have used the term "ape" to mean a member of the superfamily Hominoidea other than humans"

Here is a discussion which touches on the ins and outs of the taxonomy: http://evolvingthoughts.net/2012/03/are-humans-apes-monkeys-primates-or-hominims/

Anyway, semantics aside, the point was that just because we and other hominids evolved from a common ancestor does not mean we should all eat the same food any more it means than humans should live in trees. We are a different animal that has evolved divergently. We should eat human food not ape food. In fact even different apes around today have differing diets.

Saying that people should eat what (we assume) paleolithic man ate is fraught with enough problems yet alone taking it even further back 10 millions years or so.

A) Yes, we are apes.
B) I made no implications of diet.

 

[marian]

Saying that people should eat what (we assume) paleolithic man ate is fraught with enough problems yet alone taking it even further back 10 millions years or so.

This is a really thought provoking article from Scientific American about ancient humans and their diet.

the article touches on a ton of things that have bothered me when I hear people talk about eating "Paleo" (I have no problem with people wanting to change their diets and eat healthy but I'm super bothered by the lack of specificity the word "Paleo" implies).
One of the things that infuriates me about the Paleo craze is that most people fail to realize that the Paleolithic era was one of the longest (or is the longest? I forgot) eras of human evolution and development. Spanned hundreds of thousands of years, over which I'm sure there was quite a wide range of foods that early humans relied on.

Furthermore, when people talk about "eating Paleo", they really do look at it from a very narrow (and generally a Western) view point. What people over there may have been consuming is vastly different from what people in other continents and in other environments may have been consuming. Ugh.

And, this article doesn't discuss it, but I get so irritated when people say stupid sh!te like "Well, cave men didn't get cancer/diabetes/morbidly obese". Yeah, well cave men didn't live past 40, so they wouldn't get cancer. And they didn't drive around in shiny little metal boxes to pick up obscene amounts of highly processed food analogues at the local Qwik-E-Mart so they wouldn't get diabetes or become morbidly obese, now would they? But, I see far fewer people abandoning their cars in favor of walking or running everywhere (or in favor of riding their bikes, which probably isn't Paleo, but a sh!te ton healthier than sitting in a metal box all day, eating drive through, before picking up hundreds of dollars of processed fake food. Oh, I guess I'm wearing my ranty pants today.)

But, I think it's wicked interesting that the article briefly discusses the role of gut bacteria in digestion and nutrition. It's kind of a new field with some super interesting research. For instance, there's some studies that are starting to show that gut bacteria may play a huuuuuuuuuuge role in mood and mood regulation. It's crazy fascinating to think that little critters that help break down our food may also be influencing our day-to-day ups and downs & ranty pants. I can try to find the studies I read, if people are interested.

 

[NateTx4112]

I work for a path group with 35 of the best GI pathologists in the world that diagnose "gut critter" disease.

After having these discussions with several of them over the years there is no doubt in my (non medical and personal) mind, that eating a well balanced diet is key. You need some proteins from animals, some fruits, some vegetables.

The tricky part is grain and how much what kind. I personally think as little processed food as possible is best and try to stay whole grain and brown rice as much as possible. After really cracking down on that, I am in my best shape, blood pressure down, weight down, than I have ever been.

The key is find out not only what works for you, but what you can STICK to with your lifestyle/choices and be as healthy as you can.

 

[DPS831]

This is a really thought provoking article from Scientific American about ancient humans and their diet.

the article touches on a ton of things that have bothered me when I hear people talk about eating "Paleo" (I have no problem with people wanting to change their diets and eat healthy but I'm super bothered by the lack of specificity the word "Paleo" implies).
One of the things that infuriates me about the Paleo craze is that most people fail to realize that the Paleolithic era was one of the longest (or is the longest? I forgot) eras of human evolution and development. Spanned hundreds of thousands of years, over which I'm sure there was quite a wide range of foods that early humans relied on.

Furthermore, when people talk about "eating Paleo", they really do look at it from a very narrow (and generally a Western) view point. What people over there may have been consuming is vastly different from what people in other continents and in other environments may have been consuming. Ugh.

And, this article doesn't discuss it, but I get so irritated when people say stupid sh!te like "Well, cave men didn't get cancer/diabetes/morbidly obese". Yeah, well cave men didn't live past 40, so they wouldn't get cancer. And they didn't drive around in shiny little metal boxes to pick up obscene amounts of highly processed food analogues at the local Qwik-E-Mart so they wouldn't get diabetes or become morbidly obese, now would they? But, I see far fewer people abandoning their cars in favor of walking or running everywhere (or in favor of riding their bikes, which probably isn't Paleo, but a sh!te ton healthier than sitting in a metal box all day, eating drive through, before picking up hundreds of dollars of processed fake food. Oh, I guess I'm wearing my ranty pants today.)

But, I think it's wicked interesting that the article briefly discusses the role of gut bacteria in digestion and nutrition. It's kind of a new field with some super interesting research. For instance, there's some studies that are starting to show that gut bacteria may play a huuuuuuuuuuge role in mood and mood regulation. It's crazy fascinating to think that little critters that help break down our food may also be influencing our day-to-day ups and downs & ranty pants. I can try to find the studies I read, if people are interested.

I think "paleo" is more of a buzz word than anything else. You're right though; Early humans surely had varying diets in different geographic locations and cultures. There were likely cultures that consumed plants exclusively; just like there probably were cultures that were strictly carnivores. One of our greatest evolutionary advantages is the ability to adapt to different environments, which includes being able to survive on a variety of different foods.

The idea that early humans, or "cavemen" had short life spans is disputed. Here's a study that looked at about 50 different hunter gatherer cultures:

A fundamental conclusion we draw from this analysis is that extensive longevity appears to be a novel feature of Homo sapiens. Our results contradict
Vallois

 

[thrustyourhips]

You guys should check out the china study, it's an interesting piece of research.

I still eat meat once or twice a week, but there are a lot of benefits to a plant based whole foods diet, and thats what we should be doing.

Google why humans should eat meat, and there isn't too much material on that subject matter or arguments. But google why we should eat vegetables and fruits and there are a TON of books/documentaries on that subject matter.

Do your own due diligence, there is a plethora of information at your fingertips. I'm just glad that this topic is discussed.

 

[NateTx4112]

Google why humans should eat meat, and there isn't too much material on that subject matter or arguments. But google why we should eat vegetables and fruits and there are a TON of books/documentaries on that subject matter.

Yes because google has the access to the peer reviewed articles and is where I get my "research" for making these choices...

 

[Nozza]

A) Yes, we are apes.
B) I made no implications of diet.

A) You're just restating your case and not addressing the points made.
B) I know but this is/was diet. That's why apes were brought into it.
C) Using letters is just a bit annoying

 

[Vitamin C]

A) You're just restating your case and not addressing the points made.
B) I know but this is/was diet. That's why apes were brought into it.
C) Using letters is just a bit annoying

 

[Nozza]

Ah some borrowed humour in the form of a gif. I certainly appreciate the effort.

 

[TSO]

It's not quite that simple. What the term "ape" covers depends on who's using it. E.g. from Wikipedia: "Biologists have used the term "ape" to mean a member of the superfamily Hominoidea other than humans"

Here is a discussion which touches on the ins and outs of the taxonomy: http://evolvingthoughts.net/2012/03/are-humans-apes-monkeys-primates-or-hominims/

Anyway, semantics aside, the point was that just because we and other hominids evolved from a common ancestor does not mean we should all eat the same food any more it means than humans should live in trees. We are a different animal that has evolved divergently. We should eat human food not ape food. In fact even different apes around today have differing diets.

Saying that people should eat what (we assume) paleolithic man ate is fraught with enough problems yet alone taking it even further back 10 millions years or so.

Apes eat everything in the wild, so anything we eat is ape food.

Also, us being apes means anything we eat is ape food.

Please make sense.