I love you by panoslydios

I love you.

Begin to eat fruits and you feel things vibrate.
Begin to not eat meat and you feel things vibrate.
Begin to abstain from masturbation and you see things vibrate.
Begin to abstain from toxicity,the same.

Regeneration can come only FROM LOVE.Love aka the desire to live.

But to be human is to desire.So you have to accept that you desire also death aka toxicity aka hate.

So if i love you now ,i have to be prepared to hate you ...
The only thing that exists is existence and this opposite poles are being there so you are aware of your existence.
Come close to life you and you are aware of your existence.Come close to death the same(thats why its not easy for someone to suicide,because when it comes to that point he undestands that there is something beyond life and death).

We need this tension/going from one pole to another.Otherwise we wouldnt exist.These poles are for you to understand that you really EXIST FOREVER you never live you never die.
So when you love a girl and then you get hurted and you hate her,JUST LAUGH .Because it was about to happen.Because IT MUST HAPPEN TO GET AWARE OF YOUR EMOTIONAL PLANE OF EXISTENCE.JUST LAUGH.

And when you get awareness of this at the 7 planes of existence ,then you can say you broke free from the matrix.

I love you.

Degeneration = Lack of sulfur bearing amino acids (Vegans = need it or they will emaciate and lose hair)

There are 10 different metabolic types, to suggest we all need to eat an unsustainable diet for most is poor science.
Saying to eat vegan is just as "bad" as saying for everyone to only eat meat.

Why abstain? Yes, those who over do it can (especially imbalanced) will lose hair...but abstain? Why have hair?

Regeneration comes from sulfur bearing amino acids. Most of us have trouble assimilating proteins from bound plant cellulose, we lack 60,000 enzymes that herbivores have.

The rest sounds cool.

CausticSymmetry wrote:Degeneration = Lack of sulfur bearing amino acids (Vegans = need it or they will emaciate and lose hair)

There are 10 different metabolic types, to suggest we all need to eat an unsustainable diet for most is poor science.
Saying to eat vegan is just as "bad" as saying for everyone to only eat meat.

Why abstain?  Yes, those who over do it can (especially imbalanced) will lose hair...but abstain?  Why have hair?

Regeneration comes from sulfur bearing amino acids. Most of us have trouble assimilating proteins from bound plant cellulose, we lack 60,000 enzymes that herbivores have.

The rest sounds cool.

False.

Food is the stuff that you can throw on ground and soil and produce life.
AKA IT CONTAINS AND PRESERVES THE SPARK OF LIFE.
That is food.

Hell yeah i can live on coconut and pineapple.
Would i have hair?Ask the tribes that have done this

Why abstain from masturbation?
Why would i throw sperm on a piece of paper ?

What ?we dont have the enzymes to assimilate fruits??or grass??
Of course,modern man has now the enzyme to assimilate pizza and nazzos.
BECAUSE WHAT YOU DONT USE,YOU LOSE

So panoslydios returns with another account.

Can we have this one banned too?

Stay at curezone panoslydios, this site obviously isn't for you.

theseeker86 wrote:So panoslydios returns with another account.

Can we have this one banned too?

Stay at curezone panoslydios, this site obviously isn't for you.

I had never had a bad hair day with fruits based diet.Oh wait maybe one or two.

But trust me ,if hair and nails are indication of internal health,then never return back to meat.
Also why eat the temple of life of animals.There was blood there aka life.And there is no difference if you eat a human
cause there was also blood there in the flesh aka life.

i_love_you wrote:

theseeker86 wrote:So panoslydios returns with another account.

Can we have this one banned too?

Stay at curezone panoslydios, this site obviously isn't for you.

I had never had a bad hair day with fruits based diet.Oh wait maybe one or two.

But trust me ,if hair and nails are indication of internal health,then never return back to meat.
Also why eat the temple of life of animals.There was blood there aka life.And there is no difference if you eat a human
cause there was also blood there in the flesh aka life.

I take it you're still looking up to "MH" for advice then?

You'll be banned again soon anyway, so you might as well try and spread your bullshit around here as much as possible before then, hell you might even end up convincing someone if you try hard enough.

theseeker86 wrote:

i_love_you wrote:

theseeker86 wrote:So panoslydios returns with another account.

Can we have this one banned too?

Stay at curezone panoslydios, this site obviously isn't for you.

I had never had a bad hair day with fruits based diet.Oh wait maybe one or two.

But trust me ,if hair and nails are indication of internal health,then never return back to meat.
Also why eat the temple of life of animals.There was blood there aka life.And there is no difference if you eat a human
cause there was also blood there in the flesh aka life.

I take it you're still looking up to "MH" for advice then?

You'll be banned again soon anyway, so you might as well try and spread your bullshit around here as much as possible before then, hell you might even end up convincing someone if you try hard enough.

I proved it for myself.I am happy
No more clogging of the lymph system.

Pure sun energy not second hand protein

Yeah, cool.

So why did you bother to make another account and post the same old shit here that will only lead to you being banned again?

theseeker86 wrote:Yeah, cool.

So why did you bother to make another account and post the same old shit here that will only lead to you being banned again?

What ?banned for define existence? or for fruitarian,liquidarian,pranarian and vegetarian beliefs?

i_love_you wrote:

theseeker86 wrote:Yeah, cool.

So why did you bother to make another account and post the same old shit here that will only lead to you being banned again?

What ?banned for define existence? or for fruitarian,liquidarian,pranarian and vegetarian beliefs?

You forget why you were banned last time?

You can have whatever belief you want, the problem is you never keep it your yourself and continuously enter other threads, discredit whatever is being discussed there and just continue to spit out the same rubbish every time.

This board has nothing for you since you don't agree with anything that gets discussed here.  Only way you'll be happy is if every thread is about us eating fruits while sitting in the sun.

Great example of someone pushing an ideal/agenda/pseudo-spiritual dogma with absolutely no background in biological science, not even a basic one. Protein is second hand energy? That is nonsense.

There is a great bias in human thinking about this issue. That bias is that there is greater benefit or priority given to that which is primal/closer to the source/unadulterated.

In any other circumstance this idea tends to be true, but in biology, its completely ignoring some of the greatest miracles that are actually going on: food chains.

Yes, the sun is the original source. It is the closest thing to God we probably can point to in reality. But the miracle is that the sun's energy can be stored, and stored very efficiently in biomolecules. Technically, plants are the only organism (maybe some algaes) that are directly utilizing sunlight. They store it in the form of carbohydrates, which we humans can derive energy from. So even eating plants you are already at step two.

But if you look at the diets and adaptations of many of the greater mammals, you'll notice that they tend to get MORE benefit from eating at an even higher step in the chain. For example, ruminants are much better at extracting the energy/nutrients from plant food than we are, which has mostly to do with their gut bacteria. We absorb those nutrients better by then consuming the cow. This energy transfer system is nothing short of a miracle, its what allowed for the dramatic variety of life on earth to develop. You wouldn't be here without it.

So its a mistake for you to say you're going right to the sun by eating plants. That would require you to have plastid organelles in your cells, which you don't.

Another mistaken idea, and the one that probably pisses me off the most with vegans, is the idea that plant food is the natural food, the one that was "meant for us". Well, why? About the only reason I can think of for their thinking this is that plants don't have a mouth to make noise when they die, or have a face. But this notion is completely ridiculous. All life on earth (plant & animal alike) originated from one ancestral cell. We are all intimately related. MOTHER NATURE DIDN"T PUT ANYTHING HERE "FOR US", SHES A KILLER. Think about that idea. The only reason the very first cell survived was because it randomly developed things that stopped nature from killing it. This is the idea of adaptation and survival. Life on earth wasn't some miraculous, serendipitous "plan" where humans naturally take their role as masters and assume a "natural" plant diet. Life has only been able to grow more complex since that very first cell because it found ways to NOT BE KILLED by nature. That's it. There was not fortune or help from nature or God. It was that one in a billion shot where one cell is able to not be killed. So on and so forth, growing more and more complex as we develop more efficient ways of not dying. People tend to look at what is (regarding whats alive) and forget everything that has been wiped from existence by nature that lead up to what is there. Nature is chaos and murder, our existence here as humans isn't some glorious divine thing, it was the eons of scratching and clawing iagainst nature that eventually led to us. Nobody thinks about that battle, that we exist IN SPITE OF nature, not because of her nursing us along.

So when people eat a plant, they are eating life. That life is the very same life that is eaten when an animal is eaten. Plants just don't make a sound when they die, they don't have a face, they don't resemble us enough for vegans to feel bad about it. So the idea that killing an animal is against the "laws of nature" or some misplaced sense of spirituality is actually kind of insulting. Vegans really just feel bad because they identify more with animals because of the things mentioned before. But that's really biased. Consider an advanced alien race comes along, they don't resemble plants or humans biologically but physically they look just a little more like plants. Now assume they could eat all of the life on earth but they choose to eat humans because they feel less guilt about that. They don't identify with us as much. They have some idea that we can't feel pain because we don't express it in the same way as they do. They have a congitive dissonance operating that tells them what they're doing isn't taking life. That's the same thing as veganism. I"m sorry about the rant, I just don't think most people arguing for veganism really have a good perspective on their own beliefs.

"Panoslydios," your new posts are more "loving" but still reeks of the old school vegan pseudo science.

Here is what I mean...

Back in the dark ages of nutrition (we are still in it), let's say earlier last century I bought into the idea of this psuedo science, since all we had was books and until I actually tried all of this stuff in practice I discovered a few things...

My body was not compatible with this diet at all. After some months appearing like a concentration camp prisoner, with practically no ability to perform (extra curricular activities with my GF) and getting sick a lot, with little energy)...it started to become apparent that maybe this diet was not appropriate for me....yes, trying to be vegan...

Because in the early 90's I swallowed a lot of the nonreferenced assertions that eating meat would 'cause' problems or that it would 'promote' an inability to digest....lots of totally phony statements in many books about the lack of ability for the body to digest it or that it would take years, weeks or months to digest it....totally ridiculous.

These people/authors were believers because their diet was a miracle for them. Well, the simple truth is, we are different.

Those who shun meat and diary products usually over time have a more difficult time eating these things and then it becomes necessary for them to do without it. However, there is real reason for this. They cannot produce enough bile to emulsify these fats....part of the reason for that is lack of sulfur bearing amino acids. It's a real catch 22.

Eventually I started to notice a trend of people who attempted this diet, many of them started to hit a wall after 10 or 15 years....Especially those were really were meant to eat meat, but for political or other reasons deprived their body of what might have been better for them.

It has been observed that vegans tend to be more spiritual in a sense, because they have higher copper levels and lower zinc levels. I cannot verify this to be true....just saying.

Final thoughts, people do well with different diets...this has been studied in depth since the 60's. And it has been found
that there is no one perfect formula/diet. Go with what makes you feel your best.

CS, What you said about the lack of 60,000 enzymes... how about juicing and/or cooking vegetables to break down the cellulose prior eating along with taking cellulase enzyme? Shouldn't that help a lot with absorbing plant protein more efficiently?

Yanks wrote:CS, What you said about the lack of 60,000 enzymes... how about juicing and/or cooking vegetables to break down the cellulose prior eating along with taking cellulase enzyme? Shouldn't that help a lot with absorbing plant protein more efficiently?

Yanks, I know you are asking CS. I just wanted to chime in with my two cents.

My big question on this is why do you want to? Taking a cellulase enzyme would theoretically help you break down cellulose and would probably make some of that intracellular plant nutrition more available. But the rub is that plant proteins do not equal animal proteins. As far as it has been studied, plant proteins contain different amino acid sequences than animal proteins, even if the sequence is only off by one or two monomers. Biologically these seemingly slight differences can have astonishing effects by orders of magnitude. A proteins function is determined the most by its 3-D structure. That 3-D structure is the result of the amino acid sequence, the charges on the amino acids (mostly sulfur groups) causes the folding. What we tend to see is that animal proteins naturally contain more sulfur groups and this results in conformational changes. It is specifically these structural differences that results in our being able to utilize animal protein more than plant protein; animal proteins simply function better in animals. So even having access to plant proteins with enzymes doesn't make up for this. That said, plant proteins can still be utilized based on the fact that they can be metabolized into their consitituent aminos and used to form other proteins.

But pound for pound, you'd require more plant protein vs animal protein for the same benefits. So the question of efficiency is important.

Think of it like this, what if you could take an enzyme that helped you digest something that was normally indigestible? What is the point when you can simply consume things you are adapted to digesting? It makes little sense to do it the other way around nutritionally.

Now the argument could be made that plants contain OTHER important nutrients, so consuming them to get access to these nutrients which are relatively deficient in animals would be worth it. I'd agree. But plants developed a wonderful co-adaptive mechanism that gets around the negatives for both plant and animal: FRUIT. By concentrating its energetic molecules and nutritive stuff all in the soft, digestible flesh of a fruit, the plant offers succulent nutrition to animals. The benefits to both? The plant is able to spread its seeds via animal stool, and encourages the animals eating from it to spare its more vital tissues (we won't eat its other parts). Benefits for the animal? Digestible tissue full of vitamins/minerals and energy with proportionally less indigestible fiber than other plant tissues (stems or leaves).

It just makes sense to eat fruit. Many of the merits of eating stems/leaves are moot when you consider the cellulose content of these. Eating them along with cellulase doesn't offer that much marginal benefit, when you consider plants produce a whole host of compounds meant to ward animals off from eating these parts. Not to mention that things like vitamin K in leafy greens isn't as utilizable as the vitamin K in animals.

For me, there just isn't much sense in forcing the body to digest things that it is normally unable to digest, when the same nutrients you are after can be had through other more efficient and bioavailable means. There are simply things we are better at extracting the nutrition from, and those are the things we should eat. As CS has mentioned many times, certain people and heritages are better at handling plant food. I think the things I've said in this post can be looked at as a general bullet point, but the specifics have to be hashed out by the individual.

And of course, there is always the population problem that gets brought up. We can't sustain the world population on animal products as it stands. This is a real problem. But I think with a little sense, better resource allocation, use of smart technologies we could certainly use the world's available land to provide the kind of diet I'm talking about to everyone. Will that ever happen? Probably not, but there are a lot more factors involved in that than just the merits of the diet.

Could not have said it any better than AS54. Exactly.

In detoxification for example, vegans cannot obtain regeneration because there is simply a lack of the type of proteins
necessary (sulfur-bearing) to allow the body to produce real building blocks. For a disease model, this is especially true.

And for purposes of robust hair growth, consuming a lot of quality protein is really important.

I think the best compromise for a vegan would be a quality Bovine Colostrum. It sort of blurs the lines on veganism, however worth consideration.

Yanks - It's still difficult to obtain the protein cause of the above. However, juicing will help, as opposed to non-juiced.
I noticed in your liner notes ("low sodium")....research seems to mount that this should be revised to state
that a balance of electrolytes is more important. For example, chloride is extremely underrated, and sodium
is life saving....

Guys, I think panoslydios is very young (like still a teenager) and possibly mentally ill. Why do I say this? Cuz you can't get thru to arrogant, crazy youth and I hate to see you smart guys even trying.

whodathunkit wrote:Guys, I think panoslydios is very young (like still a teenager) and possibly mentally ill.  Why do I say this?  Cuz you can't get thru to arrogant, crazy youth and I hate to see you smart guys even trying.  

For me, I see it as an opportunity to clear the air on misconceptions. Do you remember when that poster (who is banned) "Mr. E" ?

It made no difference on what we said to him, he kept posting the propaganda, ignored the research and proceeded to post bogus (laughable) references.

Crazy though, because he still got through to some people.

Yeah, I agree with CS. Is it a waste of time trying to convince Pan of anything? Yeah probably. But there are chances someone at the forum could come along and get sent down the wrong track by one person's nonsense. Although, Pan's rhetoric is all over the place and kind of confusing, so he doesn't make a good argument to begin with, but nevertheless.

Someone might come along wanting to know about nutrition and do a google search for "I Love You By Panslydios" and wind up here and get confused. Haha.  

I've seen some of pan's posts over at curezone, and one of the posters he looks up to called "MH"

It'll give you a headache just reading some of the stuff.

I'm not usually aggressive to other members here, but Pan is just toxic for this place.

Those who feel better being a vegetarian or vegan may be due to a biofilm problem caused by FL1953/Protomyxzoa rheumatica and thus should experiment with that diet.

http://www.iadvocatehealth.org/protozoal_infection0.aspx

LETS EDUCATE THE PEOPLE HERE!!!!

@AS54 you claimed:

''And of course, there is always the population problem that gets brought up. We can't sustain the world population on animal products as it stands. This is a real problem. ''

That suggests you are messed up.You see population as slaves and by using words ''we'' you take the role of power.
Keep on animal products ,i will keep the hair

WHY YOU SHOULDNT EAT MEAT

α) you cant digest it.Fools that claim that they cant see meat in their stools is because it stays in the liver for many hours!!!!

b) you cant eat it raw!!!! that suggests this is not HUMAN FOOD. So only FRUITS ,NUTS,GRASS, AND SOME VEGETABLES THAT CAN BE EATEN RAW IS HUMAN FOOD.PERIOD.

Because NATURE DOESNT WANT US SLAVE TO COOK AND HUNT BUT GIVE US THE FOODS OUT IN THE TREES ,BERRIES AND PLANTS.TOXIC PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN INDUSTRIAL AND CEMENT WORLD CANT UNDERSTAND THIS.

c)then you have the problem,when an animal is being killed ,right before it is being slaughter it turns to be TOXIC!!!!
Of course toxic blood comes from STRESS AND FEAR OF DEATH.
Same applies with hair loss ,when fear and stress make acid blood that degrades you.PERIOD.

d)even if you eat an animal flesh,then please admit that you would also eat human flesh if you wouldnt know that on the late there is human flesh.BOTH ARE FLESH THAT THERE EXISTED LIFE .BLOOD=LIFE.

RDKML---- YOUR ELECTRICITY STERILISES YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM .YOU HAVE TO LET THE BLOOD KILL PARASITES ETC.
OTHERWISE IF YOU DONT USE YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM YOU WILL LOSE IT!!!
BEGIN TO LEARN ABOUT HERBS WHICH SUPPLY THE BLOOD WITH NUTRIENTS AND THEN THE FORTIFIED BLOOD KILLS THE PARASITES.

TO ALL LUGOLS USERS : YOU WILL STERILISE YOUR IMMUNITY IF YOU DRINK THIS POISON.LUGOLS KILLS CELLS ON CONTACT!!!! TRUST WHEN I TOOK IT INTERNALLY THE NEXT DAY A MOLE APPEARED ON MY EAR THAT THANKFULLY I KILLED IT WITH ACV.THATS SUGGEST IMMUNE SUPPRESION!!!!!!!!!!THERE ARE MANY STORIES ON CUREZONE ABOUT LUGOLS CAUSING MOLES.A POSTER CLAIMED TWO SMALL FLAT MOLES APPEARED ON LEGS AFTER APPLICATION OF LUGOLS.AND SHE KNEW THAT WAS TRUE AND NOT JUST HER IMAGINATION BECAUSE EVERYDAY SHE MASSAGED HER LEGS.

ALERT ALERT LUGOLS IS A POISON.

You seriously have issues.

Lots of misinformation panoslydios.

Nothing worse than ignorance to spread...

Ever heard of bromidism? It comes out of the skin....that's why salt loading is necessary in our
over brominated world when higher dose iodine is used.

No one has seen yet, 5 generations survive without meat...

Show me vegans surviving in freezing winters.

Claims of toxicity is nonsense.

You are often right CS, i like many of your analyse but here im actually 100% you are wrong. Human been shouldnt consume meat. I have studied that. Actually, u can but it comes with problem like beta amyloid deposit, direct oxydation, cortisol, hormonal imbalance from stressed animal, difficulties to burn from our body by acids (3 times above in meat consumption). U still can but you live shorter : telomerase shortening, and all single studies which confirm that as also the percentage of cancer and degenrative desease which come then.
Carl lewis or the strongest man from germany, and lets confirm: of the world.. Are vegan. Many studies from harvard confirm protein is just a myth.
Im sure you love meat, as i like chocolate, but keep what you believe or what u like outside the box. Keep it scientific please..
Thanks.

lydios1 wrote:
@AS54 you claimed:

''And of course, there is always the population problem that gets brought up. We can't sustain the world population on animal products as it stands. This is a real problem. ''

That suggests you are messed up.You see population as slaves and by using words ''we'' you take the role of power.
Keep on animal products ,i will keep the hair

WHY YOU SHOULDNT EAT MEAT

α) you cant digest it.Fools that claim that they cant see meat in their stools is because it stays in the liver for many hours!!!!

b) you cant eat it raw!!!! that suggests this is not HUMAN FOOD. So only FRUITS ,NUTS,GRASS, AND SOME VEGETABLES THAT CAN BE EATEN RAW IS HUMAN FOOD.PERIOD.

Because NATURE DOESNT WANT US SLAVE TO COOK AND HUNT BUT GIVE US THE FOODS OUT IN THE TREES ,BERRIES AND PLANTS.TOXIC PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN INDUSTRIAL AND CEMENT WORLD CANT UNDERSTAND THIS.

c)then you have the problem,when an animal is being killed ,right before it is being slaughter it turns to be TOXIC!!!!
Of course toxic blood comes from STRESS AND FEAR OF DEATH.
Same applies with hair loss ,when fear and stress  make acid blood that degrades you.PERIOD.

d)even if you eat an animal flesh,then please admit that you would also eat human flesh if you wouldnt know that on the late there is human flesh.BOTH ARE FLESH THAT THERE EXISTED LIFE .BLOOD=LIFE.

Pan, your argument is so full of flaws, twisted logic, and blatant lies that this could be a huge post to prove you wrong, but at this point, I'm not in the mood for that and your trolling is getting to the point of being unworthy of any more attention.

How did my quote suggest I view the human population as slaves. Actually, very much the contrary. Rather, by using the word "we" I was just referring to ourselves (the whole population) as a group. I simply made the statement that as our current food technologies and economies stand, our population couldn't be sustained by an animal food diet. That says nothing about the diet itself, but rather the flaws in our current systems and uses of resources. I didn't make any statement about slavery anywhere in that.

Let's just blow through your points and demolish each one:

a) You can digest meat, humans have been doing it since very, very early on as a species. Get's caught in the liver? Are you kidding? Didn't you even have to take a biology course growing up? This is actually just bizarre. For any readers...No, meat does not enter the liver.

b) A couple of things wrong with this one. First, yes you can eat meat raw. If it has just recently been butchered and is from a quality, healthy source, fresh meat can be eaten raw quite safely. I've done it. But it isn't as palatable and you certainly wouldn't want to eat meat raw as it is processed by today's typical standards and distributed through grocery stores (that's obvious, but just because some meat is MADE unhealthy through processing doesn't make all meat bad). Secondly, what on earth are you basing your claim on that human beings can only eat things that are uncooked. Cooking was actually an important part of human evolution. The technology of cooking literally influenced how you and I evolved, socialized, and influenced adaptations in our digestive tracts. It made things more digestible actually, and safer, including your precious vegetables. In fact, cooking along with other forms of traditional processing techniques are the only ways we can eat some vegetables safely.

Eating grass, really? That is just unbelievable. Take a look at a dog. Why does a dog eat grass? To force itself to vomit.

c)  There are some statements made here that are lacking evidence. If you find a study that shows higher levels of stress hormones in livestock shortly before slaughter or shortly after, then this would be interesting. But here's the thing, its a moot point. Nowhere in this entire discourse have we ever said that meat that comes from the large mega farms where animals are treated very poorly is a good thing. In fact, its awful. These farms need to be shut down. But meat that is raised in a quality, sustainable, organic way in which animals are treated well and killed in the most humane way possible, then there is nothing to worry about here. In fact, these animals have a pretty good evolutionary arrangement if you ask me. They are guaranteed a life with shelter, food, and the ability to reproduce (in some cases). These species have only remained on earth because they were domesticated. While treating them poorly is always wrong/unethical, there is nothing inherently wrong or unethical about killing these animals for meat. Again, its a co-evolutionary arrangement in which these animals trade slaughter for the ability to live and eat peacefully for longer than they'd probably live in nature.

d) The statement that blood = life is insulting. Go back and read my previous post, life exists in plants as well. The very same kind of life. Just because a plant doesn't have a face or make a sound when it dies, doesn't mean it isn't a living thing. It has the same life as you. So to say that taking an animals life just because you feel worse about it, that is so hypocritical it infuriates me. Life is life, life takes other life as a means of survival, its called a food chain and every organism on earth that has ever lived has participated in them. That means every organism that has ever existed took the life of some other organism for survival. Its nature. It is.

Lastly, Shinobi, could you possibly post a few of the studies you mentioned showing the benefits of veganism? I'd suspect that most of these were probably related to cardiovascular health, and the huge issue here is that there are so many other variables that were also at play that may have effected heart health. Probably the biggest confounding variables are physical activity and total caloric intake. On a vegan/vegetarian diet, the individuals participating probably ended up taking in less calories and generally probably did more physical work, as one does when they start a health regimen. Overall, CS point is absolutely true. Show us a 5 generation longitudinal study on the effects of veganism. It isn't there because veganism is an experiment. There hasn't been a single ancestral culture that ever ate this way. What does that say? What does it say that every culture that has ever existed ate some form of animal flesh?