Meat-heavy low-carb diets can "shorten lifespan": Study - Sensationalist Headlines

This implies purpose. Evolution has no purpose. Evolution has no direction. If the most "Fit" creature was a blob that ate whatever around it, then that would be what we would see everywhere. Evolution does not imply purpose, design, or direction. We cannot "Devolve" a creature. I don't think nature even exists. It's not a real term describing a real thing. It's a result of our pathetically short life spans that we see "Nature" as a balanced force. It is not. Nature is catastrophe and destruction.

Isn't Keto really just meant exclusively for weight loss? That's always the impression I got from ketosis and stuff. I suppose a balanced diet would have some meat, some vegetables, maybe a bit of fruit, and some carbs here and there. Like eating grated chocolate bars on honey lined slices of bread is obviously going to be really bad for you and make you horribly fat, but a bit of rice with your meal or a potato here and there won't hurt.

I know that evolution has no purpose. I've literally read all of Dawkins' books on the subject. I am talking about the fact that they have devolved in respect to their environment. Evolution is referring to how things become more perfectly adapted to their environment over time, but selective breeding kills that, as it's not their natural environment. It's called 'Natural Selection' for a reason.

If anything they’ve evolved to better eek out an existence without working for it. they evolved and domesticated us for their benefit. Did dogs “devolve”? No, they’ve grown to take advantage of our innate desire to protect cute things. They domesticated us too. Many people are waking up to this reality that we were and are manipulated in the past on these issues. Keto is not JUST for weight loss even if that is a primary driver for many people. hunter gatherers who lived lives of subsistence absolutely would be in a state of keto with some regularity.

Depends on the breed. Pugs and many breeds have developed serious health complications as a result of selective breeding. Dogs are different though, because it's a much more symbiotic relationship than we have with pigs and such.

a study funded by Big Gluten

#FreeGluten

I'm not even vegetarian but I always find this argument really peculiar. We simply stop breeding pigs and slaughter the current 'generation'. No more pigs. Slaughtering the current generation is nothing compared to the indefinite slaughtering of generation upon generation that is the meat industry. It's all about harm reduction as much as is practically possible- no one would suggest not wearing seatbelts is better than wearing them because they don't eliminate road deaths entirely. Likewise, slaughtering just the current generation of livestock doesn't eliminate harm entirely, but there is still vastly less harm than a continuation of the meat industry.

I honestly never heard that argument before until it was brought up in this thread. Some rationale behind it would be nice because I also couldn't make any sense of it.

I'm not actually after "harm reduction". I'm after sustainable practices. I also think that just letting these animals go extinct is worse than just farming them until the rest of time. It's entirely arbitrary. Your metric is arbitrary. My metric is arbitrary.

Extinction doesn't necessitate harm in of itself, but farming them until the rest of time does.That's the difference and it's not arbitrary. If we were to stop trying to get pandas to breed in captivity and they went extinct as a result, there would be no extra harm is caused to individual pandas than if we did continue to breed them.

Again, I'm worried about far more than just how something feels in the short term. Pigs, cows, and chickens raised in ethical ways live better lives than any animal in nature does. Then they die. Oh no, what else dies? Everything. It's maximizing their utility. The fact you don't recognize your own goals as arbitrary is funny to me, they are absolutely arbitrary.

Why? Is letting a species go extinct inherently bad?

Man I eat what I feel like eating, last week we ate some fried chicken and meatballs, yesterday I had peaches and bananas today I had a bunch of dairy stuff heck I can live off chocolate as well fuck it. Don't force your body just because some shithead told you its good.

I'm finding it hard to follow your logic here. You're saying that farming animals is good because otherwise they go extinct, or they suffer and die in the wild?

If the question is between the suffering of animal or the non-existance of those animals, I choose suffering. Life is suffering. Where and when would they live existences free of suffering? We can treat them well, we can practice ethical farming. I don't understand why that's such a fucking bugbear for some people here. It's not all or nothing.

Or we can keep a few of them around as pets without eating them? It's not all or nothing.

The only way your argument makes sense is if you think farming has some sort of intrinsic value, and farm animals deserve to exist.

Farming has a large value, yes. I grew up around it, and there is a definite value to it, to the people doing it, and to the land it's done on. Now, of course, this doesn't apply in a "Factory farm" setting. And I have made great pains to say I don't support that.

This doesn't even imply that it's the low carbs that are the problem, just that meat isn't good for you. the article says a low carb plant based diet would be fine.

What turned you into such an ass? You used to be a pretty decent poster but these days you just keep spouting this kind of trite. We can debate without resorting to such haughty phrases. Yeah sure I don't see why anybody would have an objection to that. Why waste the meat after all? I brought up pets in response to your assertion about farming being necessary to prevent those species from being extinct. Using them as pets is an alternative to breeding them for commercial purposes that also achieves that goal.

Nothing happened to me. some people are arguing extremes that I don’t agree with like we shouldn’t have any meat in our diets at all or that all forms of farming are unethical. I disagree. By defending ethical farming practices many people imply I defend much worse things even when it’s stated clearly that I don’t. My patience is limited after all I’m only human. Yes you’re right it is an option I failed to consider previously, and it’s one I would support people who have the room to do so, to do so. I just don’t see a reason why small farms can’t vkntinue to exist. Much of the practices I’m speaking about are practices in my nation and yours, on smaller scales currently.

I will die a happy man then. Fuck bread. Feast on steak & chicken.

Why not both? I can't imagine living without meat, or bread, or pasta, or rice, or chocolate, or the great pastries we make in Portugal. I can't imagine my diet being based around a single thing or avoiding huge chunks of food to choose from.

You actually started posting drastically differently a few months ago.

Well that's one hell of an absurd argument, but I can see you're throwing everything you can to make the point that ethical farming = good, so I'll only respond on that point. Like I said before, ethical farming is better for the livestock involved, however it is still terrible for the environment. Maybe even more so than traditional livestock farming because more land is required which leads to more deforestation. However, it still has all the problems of traditional livestock farming such as deforestation, high water use, high levels of waste, carbon dioxide pollution, methane pollution etc. leading to the greatest negative impact on the environment and the largest contributor to climate change, even more so than the oil and gas industry. Unless this environmental impact can be dramatically reduced then livestock farming, ethical or not, unfortunately cannot be supported.

Grow meat in labs.

This is an actual problem that scientists have to deal with even careful wording can be disasterous.

I think you better back that up with actual facts if you’re going to definite say there’s no way to sustainably farm animals. Many disagree with you.

Isn't it that 'Keto Diet' thing that's been trending like hell this year? If it is, it wouldn't surprise me if it shortens lifespans considering it's high in fat but low on carbs.