The Raw Vegan Paradox ?!?!?

[Im Your Man]

that means more calories are needed to break down a steak than a watermelon.

 

Undoubtedly.

 

I know you like watermelons. It is obvious too that eating a watermelon is better for health and provides more energy than a steak.

 

Is that you on the motorcycle ?

[Zack]

that means more calories are needed to break down a steak than a watermelon.

 

Undoubtedly.

 

I know you like watermelons. It is obvious too that eating a watermelon is better for health and provides more energy than a steak.

 

Is that you on the motorcycle ?

 

I loveeeeeeeeeee watermelons.

 

Yes it is.

[michaelhobson]

I went raw and dropped a kg now I'm 180cm tall and 55kg, but I don't feel that I got weaker, I have lot more energy, I hope with lots of exercise I will pack on muscles, because sometimes I freak out that I'm tooooo skinny

 

I'm your height and 15kg heavier and feel skinny! Eat man! Quick. Eat anything and everything!

woaaaaa, now I feel ultraskinny, I'm eating all day, I don't get wich I don't mind, muscle is coming, but thats a long journey to get really muscular, but I'm not really a bodybuilder, my goal is not to be extra huge

 

As long as we're at it, I'm 193cm and 106kg.

 

It is obvious too that eating a watermelon is better for health and provides more energy than a steak.

 

Not obvious at all. If you're trying to build muscle, you're much better off with the steak than the watermelon. You're not going to build any muscle at all eating only watermelons.

[Zack]

 

It is obvious too that eating a watermelon is better for health and provides more energy than a steak.

 

Not obvious at all. If you're trying to build muscle, you're much better off with the steak than the watermelon. You're not going to build any muscle at all eating only watermelons.

 

What he said.

 

 

Not that I'm advocating steak or anything.

[DV]

 

Wobby Lifter, at first view the video may seem to contradict what I said about calories, but this is not about calories anymore but about the nature of the food itself, it's molecular structure is modified when it's cooked; the food becomes less of a food and becomes more of a innert object (because it's not living anymore, it,s dead) so the body don't even see it as food, the nutrients are not all absorbed by the body to use as energy, not rejected by the body. The body is not able to use this dead "food" for anything useful so it just goes straight to storage of fat.

 

This is a non-scientific, non-fact-based theory of food digestion and fat storage. Whoever gave you this idea pulled this one out of the air. It even contradicts itself.

 

I know there are members who think Brendan Brazier is some sort of nutrition expert but keep in mind that he's an athlete selling a product and a THEORY of what happens when HE eats raw vs. cooked foods.

 

Veganism isn't a magic bullet and neither is raw foodism. The laws of physiology don't go out the window when you eat a food that is "alive."

[Im Your Man]

that means more calories are needed to break down a steak than a watermelon.

 

Undoubtedly.

 

I know you like watermelons. It is obvious too that eating a watermelon is better for health and provides more energy than a steak.

 

Is that you on the motorcycle ?

 

I loveeeeeeeeeee watermelons.

 

Yes it is.

 

Nice bike and also nice picture ! you should participate to the muscles contests and ask the same photographer to take you in picture.

 

I'm gonna have some watermelons this summer, it's been so long since I had one.

I should have say : a few bites of meat could take 4 hours to digest while a whole giant watermelon would take only 30 minutes.

 

I didn't know until today but watermelon is the fruit that takes the less time to digest (15-30 minutes). I always thought all fruits take about the same time. But I have a book that says: for acid fruits it's 1 hour, low-acid fruits is 1h and a half, sweet fruits (banana and dried fruits) 4 hours! But I'm pretty sure it takes less time than this for all fruits.

[michaelhobson]

I should have say : a few bites of meat could take 4 hours to digest while a whole giant watermelon would take only 30 minutes.

 

I didn't know until today but watermelon is the fruit that takes the less time to digest (15-30 minutes). I always thought all fruits take about the same time. But I have a book that says: for acid fruits it's 1 hour, low-acid fruits is 1h and a half, sweet fruits (banana and dried fruits) 4 hours! But I'm pretty sure it takes less time than this for all fruits.

 

So meat and dried fruit take about the same amount of time to digest. Is there a point to this?

[Im Your Man]

I should have say : a few bites of meat could take 4 hours to digest while a whole giant watermelon would take only 30 minutes.

 

I didn't know until today but watermelon is the fruit that takes the less time to digest (15-30 minutes). I always thought all fruits take about the same time. But I have a book that says: for acid fruits it's 1 hour, low-acid fruits is 1h and a half, sweet fruits (banana and dried fruits) 4 hours! But I'm pretty sure it takes less time than this for all fruits.

 

So meat and dried fruit take about the same amount of time to digest. Is there a point to this?

 

That's what the author says... doesn't mean it's the truth...

I can't imagine eating some fresh dates would take 4 hours to digest. I always have tought that sweet fruits and dried fruits were on the contrary the fastest fruits to digest. Even endurance athletes like cyclists eat some raisins and other dried fruits or even fig cookies to provide quick energy.

Edited May 29, 2008 by I'm Your Man

[ChaserHUN]

I've red that bananas and dried fruits take an hour 1, other fruits about 30-45 minutes

 

edit: is palm oil raw?