Protein in Fruit

[DV]

 

Didn't we already rip apart that Tim VanOrden ridiculousness in another thread?

No, where ? what's wrong with him ?

But seriously' date=' there are no fruitarians who are bodybuilders for a reason. Maybe some endurance athletes might dabble in it - but not the ones at the top of their game.[/quote'] There are no, or not many, fruitarian bodybuilders because there are not many fruitarians. Tim, richard blackman, durian rider all have more muscles than you do (I know they're men...) eventhough they're not bodybuilders. Oh and you say they don't perform at the top of their sport ? Perhaps you haven't seen Tim's race results.. He's more on top than me and you that's for sure.

Let's get one point very clear. Building muscle on fruit is COMPLETELY different than maintaining muscle on fruit.

It's different but not so much. what's the scientific study behind your reasonning ( don't tell me you don't need one' date=' but that I need one for "food combinings"). Maintaining : the body is always rebuilding. To build more, eat more. [/quote']

 

Strong logic comparing male to female . I also have a hard time believing either of them are bigger than dv, let alone stronger.

 

Richard's arms were listed @ 13" on bb.com, I'm sure DV isn't too far from there. As far as tim or durian, unlikely.

 

 

Good eye, Zack!! Flexed is 13" and relaxed is 12 3/4" - but I'm planning on increasing those numbers!

[RawVgn]

I have no trouble gaining weight as a raw vegan: just eat more nuts and fruit and greens and lift hard and heavy. I'm 47 yrs old and have put on 11 pounds in the past 5 months and its good and lean. At 6-1 167 I'm about the same size as the guys on the Univ of Wi wrestling team who are 6-1. I eat less than 10% protein and take no supplements of any kind. 10% of 2500 cals is 250 divided by 4 is about 60 plus grams of protein a day (I probably avg 5% protein daily). 60 grams is a little over 2 ounces-since it's raw it's not denatured and is possibly fully utilized. 2 ounces a day is 1 pound a wk approximately or 50 plus pounds a year! Just how much of the stuff do you think you need? And lets not forget the body reuses about 2/3 of the "waste" amino acids it generates. Net protein requirements are VERY LOW which is why bulls, who eat almost entirely grass, reach 2500 plus pounds-all raw! Until I went raw, I was never able to gain muscle mass or strength; I didn't know how to lift really intensely though either.

 

The World Health Organization, Colin Campbell, and many experts agree that 10% of calories (which includes a cautionary extra amount) from protein is adequate. And there is no evidence more is better and substantial evidence more is unhealthy. Even some hard core body building experts like Ellington Darden advise against taking large amounts of protein supplements.

[xjohanx]

I've emailed with a lot of experts that reccomend protein intake around 5-15% and they all say that if you're an athlete you should consume more. I'm not sure about Colin Campbell though, but I guess since the body needs more protein when you need to repair more muscle (from excersise) he would say the same thing.

Again,the WHO base their numbers on an average citizen who sits still at work and do not work out.

[Zack]

I'm so tired of this "pure protein" trash about raw food. Denaturing is NOT bad, it's easier to digest and utilize. The stomach will do it anyways.

[ChaserHUN]

http://www.organicathlete.org/organicathlete-conference/charlie-abel-how-build-muscle-raw-food-diet-2005

look at Charlie Abel, he mainly follows 811, but Doug Graham didn't said to don't eat nuts and seeds or avocados, he just said to keep it low

[xjohanx]

I couldn't really find a background info on this dude but my guess is that he is one of those guys who build his body on a meat based/cooked diet then went raw and tells everyone how easy it is to build muscle on a raw diet when he himself is only maintaning! I might be wrong, please provide me with some background checks on this dude.

[RawVgn]

If cooked food is so advantageous, how come peoples white blood cell counts typically triple after eating it? Seems very suspicious to me, since white blood cells are an immune response to fight pathogens and toxins. This "White Tide" does not occur after eating raw food.

 

Where is your evidence that proteins are easier to digest after modifying their molecules with heat? I've never seen anything suggesting proteins are EASIER to digest after cooking.

 

Thanks for pointing out your opinion is based on a "geuss"; it might be useful to someone...I geuss. If your talking about Richard Blackman, he has always struck me as an honest person, though pretty radical even by my standards.

[Im Your Man]

http://www.organicathlete.org/organicathlete-conference/charlie-abel-how-build-muscle-raw-food-diet-2005

look at Charlie Abel, he mainly follows 811, but Doug Graham didn't said to don't eat nuts and seeds or avocados, he just said to keep it low

thank you for that link. I enjoyed watching that video. He's pretty muscular for a nearly 50 years old guy. Of course he's not huge, he says himself he's never been so big even during his 20's as an omni, cooked diet, and at 50 years old you already start losing lean mass. I think this video gives lots of informations for your question SydneyVegan. He also gives interesting answers about many topics, such as the B12 issue.

 

There's many info about him. Just google his name and there's his website too. Also, we already talked about him on the forum : http://www.veganbodybuilding.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=14053

[RawVgn]

Richard also states he is not interested in being huge; he doesn't even lift weights; he's into body weight exercises.

[Im Your Man]

If cooked food is so advantageous, how come peoples white blood cell counts typically triple after eating it? Seems very suspicious to me, since white blood cells are an immune response to fight pathogens and toxins. This "White Tide" does not occur after eating raw food.

 

This is true, and a biological evidence that anything denatured is harmless to the body, at different levels. I've forgotten about this one because it's been a while since I first read it, thanks for reminding it. Everything slightly or highly transformed, by heat or any other process (and they all involve cooking in some way) is detrimental to health. This constant and repetitive attacks to the body affects and weaken the organism, the consequences manifests after some decades, like all degenarative habits. I'm wondering if eating a genetically modified organism, raw, like a tomato for instance, causes this white blood cells effect too. I guess yes. I don't know if such experiment has already been done, but if not, it would be a very easy experiement to make, and it would prove instantly that these organisms are not the same in the body than organic foods.

 

EDIT: Yes such a study has been done, but on rats, and is positive. Why the hell they don't do it on humans, it's not as if the subjects would be administrated stuff that they don't already use on their own.

 

Research result: Rats that were fed GM potatoes suffered damaged immune systems. Their white blood cells responded much more sluggishly than those fed a non-GMO control diet.

http://safealt.org/GMOinfo.htm

[Fallen_Horse]

This is true, and a biological evidence that anything denatured is harmless to the body, at different levels. I've forgotten about this one because it's been a while since I first read it, thanks for reminding it. Everything slightly or highly transformed, by heat or any other process (and they all involve cooking in some way) is detrimental to health. This constant and repetitive attacks to the body affects and weaken the organism, the consequences manifests after some decades, like all degenarative habits.

Ok, but this isn't a great argument. Yes, digestion breaks down the body, but so does everything else. Walking breaks the body down; all exercise does. The body is made to break down and then repair and rebuild itself over and over and over. Denaturing proteins is what the body is meant to do.

 

Raw food is great, but cooked food is great too...

[RawVgn]

The several research studies that have been done showed that raw food does not create a White Tide immune response like cooked food. I don't think an all or nothing approach is wise. Taken along with other evidence, I'll make choices that lighten the toxic load on my body and preserve its immune resources to fight other struggles.

 

Research has to be funded, and only the wealthy have adequate resources. In the US, if research doesn't profit a wealthy funding contributer it probably won't get done. "We have the best government money can buy."

[Zack]

The several research studies that have been done showed that raw food does not create a White Tide immune response like cooked food. I don't think an all or nothing approach is wise. Taken along with other evidence, I'll make choices that lighten the toxic load on my body and preserve its immune resources to fight other struggles.

 

 

Please prove this, and I don't want to hear it from some raw guru's mouth.

[xjohanx]

The several research studies that have been done showed that raw food does not create a White Tide immune response like cooked food. I don't think an all or nothing approach is wise. Taken along with other evidence, I'll make choices that lighten the toxic load on my body and preserve its immune resources to fight other struggles.

 

 

Please prove this, and I don't want to hear it from some raw guru's mouth.

 

YES! Please do! You said that there is a mountain of research proving that a raw food diet is optimal and now you're saying "several research studies" proves this. Where are those studies? You haven't even shown us one study dude!

Normally, if someone on this forum would say that a study showed something, I would believe it. But since I've tried pretty hard to find studies done on raw food and always fallen short I'm really curious where the mountain is hiding. Back it up, or shut up! No offense meant.

[Im Your Man]

The several research studies that have been done showed that raw food does not create a White Tide immune response like cooked food. I don't think an all or nothing approach is wise. Taken along with other evidence, I'll make choices that lighten the toxic load on my body and preserve its immune resources to fight other struggles.

 

 

Please prove this, and I don't want to hear it from some raw guru's mouth.

 

YES! Please do! You said that there is a mountain of research proving that a raw food diet is optimal and now you're saying "several research studies" proves this. Where are those studies? You haven't even shown us one study dude!

Normally, if someone on this forum would say that a study showed something, I would believe it. But since I've tried pretty hard to find studies done on raw food and always fallen short I'm really curious where the mountain is hiding. Back it up, or shut up! No offense meant.

 

What do you mean you want proof ? You didn't know that cooked food cause the immune system to panick and defend itself while raw foods don't ? This stress on the body is not like walking or something like that, like FallenHorse said.

 

You say you've "tried pretty hard to find studies done on raw food and always fallen short", not surprrising, since you also said

I couldn't really find a background info on this dude but my guess is that he is one of those guys who build his body on a meat based/cooked diet then went raw and tells everyone how easy it is to build muscle on a raw diet when he himself is only maintaning! I might be wrong, please provide me with some background checks on this dude.

lol, it's not really hard, just type in "charlie abel raw" on google and you'll have 12 500 000 results.

 

This guy made the experiments himself for years and he shows the results to the world, that it's possible to build muscles on a raw food diet without any supplements, it answers sydneyvegan's question a million times better than a scientific research could ever do. This guy is 50 years old and in top shape while Arnold Swartz. is now just an old fat man.

 

Since it's impossible to make a study on raw food with a large group of humans and keep them on close surveillance 24/7 for a long period of time, the only proofs you'll get are the white blood cells evidence, or other things like that who do not require to control a million of factors, which is impossible to do... or studies on animals, because we can control 100% their diet and we know they can't cheat.

 

So there was this experiment by Pottenger made on 900 cats over a period of 10 years. A group fed on raw meat and another one on cooked meat. The cats on a raw diet were in top shape and having healthy kittens. Those on a cooked diet were suffering chronic diseases since the first weeks of the experiment, and then serious degenerative diseases of all kinds, the 2nd generation was very weak and all the cats of the 3rd generation were dying.

 

Here's 2 links about this study. One that says it doesn't prove anything.

And another link, more neutral.

 

The one that says it doesn't prove anything for humans... hmm ok, so humans are superior and deficient food don't affect us? Is there a proof for this?

Cats today live well on 100% cooked food. But it is highly supplemented, otherwise it would be as tragic as in the experiment.

 

They write

Was Pottenger's cooked diet detrimental because it was "dead" or simply deficient?

Lol, precisely, the meat is deficient because it is cooked.

...it is not that the food is somehow "dead" ... that is the underlying problem, but rather that the diet fed by Pottenger was deficient in some way.

It was the exact same diet, one was raw meat, the other diet was cooked meat. Cats in nature will eat their meat raw, and some raw grass for vitamins and fibres.

Moreover, one cannot compare pet diets--particularly cat diets--with cooked human diets, which are less monotonous and hence provide a larger variety of nutrients.

Precisely, humans on a cooked diet only manage because their diet is never 100% cooked, but includes also some fruits and greens.

[Zack]

while Arnold Swartz. is now just an old fat man.

 

An old (not fat) man that has achieved more than you or charlie able.

[xjohanx]

@I'm your man!

I wanted background info on that Abel guy. I tried to google him but I couldn't find how he looked pre-raw. Insted of acting like an asshole just send me a link.

And about the white blood cells. No I didn't know that, at least that it is specific for cooked food and not raw. Big whoop. Again insted of acting like an asshole just send me the studies that prove it.

And since you now also seem to claim that there are so many studies done on raw food and that they are easy to find, why don't you just show them to me because obviously I can't find them. Telling me that I'm bad at googling or whatever doesn't help anyone.

PLEASE START PROVIDING SCIENCE INSTED OF JUST HIPPIE TALK! If it's so easy to find it shouldn't be this hard to post some links, right?

[Im Your Man]

@I'm your man!

I wanted background info on that Abel guy. I tried to google him but I couldn't find how he looked pre-raw. Insted of acting like an asshole just send me a link.

And about the white blood cells. No I didn't know that, at least that it is specific for cooked food and not raw. Big whoop. Again insted of acting like an asshole just send me the studies that prove it.

And since you now also seem to claim that there are so many studies done on raw food and that they are easy to find, why don't you just show them to me because obviously I can't find them. Telling me that I'm bad at googling or whatever doesn't help anyone.

PLEASE START PROVIDING SCIENCE INSTED OF JUST HIPPIE TALK! If it's so easy to find it shouldn't be this hard to post some links, right?

and you, provide science that cooked diet is superior or equal to raw diet.

the pics of young not-raw Abel were easy to find, and I already provided the links, (I guess you're half blind and need that gmo blond rice you were talking about in another thread and that would save the world, guess what, this blond rice can't even grow in the nature and has very low beta caroten... I know all this is off-topic that's why I put parentheses, anyway dv is not here these days...)

I never said it's easy to find good studies on raw food, rawvgn said that. Go read my post, I said that you'll never find a good study on raw food with a large group of humans and on a long period of time, because it's impossible to do and to control all the factors that can alterate the results. I talked about the cats study, and nobody reacts to this of course.

 

RawVgn also asked you guys to provide a study that prove that processed proteins are easier to digest, but yet you ignore his demand.

 

Can't you all see and admit that you will always deny the evidence even when just in front of your eyes, just like people who eat meat do and will continue to do for very long ?

 

Zack, Arnold is a big fat ass on these pics, no matter what he accomplished before.

 

All the pics of Arnie and Charlie are in the links, but since nobody want to see the reality by clicking on the links, I need to force you to see the facts...

arnold

charlie abel, 49 years old, raw

charlie abel in his twenties

[Zack]

yeah he was recovering from heart surgery when those shots were taken, very fair. Besides, he isn't even fat in those pictures, he has a lot of extra skin.

[xjohanx]

First of all I think you are confusing me with someone else when you're talking about that rice. I don't ever remebering supporting GMO and if I did I would really like to see those quotes. Maybe my memory is failing me.

I have never acctually claimed that a cooked diet is superior/equal to a raw diet. I told RawVgn that he should provide some scientific evidence since HE claimed that the RAW FOOD DIET was SUPERIOR. And I stand by that since I think it is a pretty bold statement to make without actual evidence.

You seemed suprised when I didn't believe you about the white blood cell-issue (raw vs cooked) and you implied that this was basic knowledge so I asked you to provide some evidence (shouldn't be so hard to find since this is so basic).

I'm sorry that I didn't comment on the cat study but I'm vegan for AR reasons and I hate stuff like that.

 

RawVgn also asked you guys to provide a study that prove that processed proteins are easier to digest, but yet you ignore his demand.

I never claimed so. Don't know much about it honestly. Personally I find it easy to digest both cooked and raw proteins. Theoretically pre-denatured proteins should be easier on the body since the cooking basically does the stomach acids job in advance, but this is not something I know for a fact.

 

About the Arnold pics it is like Zack said. Those pics were taken after a surgery, most people don't look so great after that. And "now" in those pics is 3 years ago, at least.

About the Abel pics. He looks great for a 50 year old. Hands down I am really impressed. But it is obvious that he lost muscle mass during his raw food diet (which is natural in his age) and he is certainly no proof that a raw food diet is good for building muscle.

[Im Your Man]

First of all I think you are confusing me with someone else when you're talking about that rice. I don't ever remebering supporting GMO and if I did I would really like to see those quotes. Maybe my memory is failing me.

You're right, I just checked and it was Medman. You kinda look like him though. I hope you'll accept my apologies. I think it's my biggest mistake since a long time...

 

But I find it curious that scientific datas are so important for you and you absolutly ask for proofs, while it seems you're more likely to use your common sense instead of referring to scientific studies :

"I think", "I don't ever remebering " , "Maybe my memory is failing me.", "Personally" " Theoretically" "should be" "I guess", "I geuss" "but this is not something I know for a fact." "Don't know much about it honestly"...

 

At least you're being honnest, lol.

Insted of acting like an asshole just send me a link.

Asked so politely... It's strange but I don't want to. Looks like you'll have to search by yourself.

 

About the Abel pics. He looks great for a 50 year old. Hands down I am really impressed. But it is obvious that he lost muscle mass during his raw food diet (which is natural in his age) and he is certainly no proof that a raw food diet is good for building muscle.

Unfortunately for you and people who dream of a "perfect" proof, that's the best evidence you'll ever get, so you better accept it or not, you chose. He's building muscles, the proof is that he has muscles. Otherwise he would be less muscular at this age. The only better proof you can find is by experimenting on yourself. Both methods are far superior than what a scientist could say about an experiment on rats or an observation on microscope. As vegans, we all know that the best evidence of veganism is ourself. Samething for raw diet.

[Zack]

He's building muscles, the proof is that he has muscles. Otherwise he would be less muscular at this age. The only better proof you can find is by experimenting on yourself. Both methods are far superior than what a scientist could say about an experiment on rats or an observation on microscope. As vegans, we all know that the best evidence of veganism is ourself. Samething for raw diet.

 

It's really obvious that he's small by those pictures. Look at the size of his head in relation to everything else....He is lean, but haven't seen any new photos, those are years old. So is he really building anything? I think not.

[sydneyvegan]

http://www.organicathlete.org/organicathlete-conference/charlie-abel-how-build-muscle-raw-food-diet-2005

look at Charlie Abel, he mainly follows 811, but Doug Graham didn't said to don't eat nuts and seeds or avocados, he just said to keep it low

thank you for that link. I enjoyed watching that video. He's pretty muscular for a nearly 50 years old guy. Of course he's not huge, he says himself he's never been so big even during his 20's as an omni, cooked diet, and at 50 years old you already start losing lean mass. I think this video gives lots of informations for your question SydneyVegan. He also gives interesting answers about many topics, such as the B12 issue.

 

There's many info about him. Just google his name and there's his website too. Also, we already talked about him on the forum : http://www.veganbodybuilding.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=14053

 

Charlie Abel eats nuts, so this doesn't really answer the question I posed originally.

I know nuts contain protein as does Algae (Lean and Green is testament to that - He is the biggest, most muscular Raw Vegan I have seen, and I have the up most respect for him)

I know a lot of raw vegans who do great things, but! they eat nuts and other protein rich foods.

 

I'm not going to get into B12, but I will say.

I supplement B12 everyday, it's not worth the risk.

A deficiency can take up to 20 years to become evident, by which time you are in serious trouble.

Don't believe the mumbo jumbo, hippy, guru hype, supplement B12 or suffer the consequences.

[Im Your Man]

yeah the nuts, I forgot about this one... but he only eats half a cup per day, or none if he eat avocado instead. Gorillas and some apes are considered fruitarians even if they eat greens and nuts. Nuts are oleaginous fruits. To build muscles with only fruits, I don't know. Tim VanOrden says he's building muscles without lifting and without nuts, seeds or anything except fruits and greens. But I'm not Tim so I don't know if it's possible. But he eats many Lara bars and there's nuts in that, so maybe he ends up with also about 1/2 cup of nuts/day. RawVgn, many others also say it's possible to build muscles with fruits and without any food high in proteins. But we'll never know for sure until we try ourself. That's what these guys made.

[xjohanx]

First of all I think you are confusing me with someone else when you're talking about that rice. I don't ever remebering supporting GMO and if I did I would really like to see those quotes. Maybe my memory is failing me.

You're right, I just checked and it was Medman. You kinda look like him though. I hope you'll accept my apologies. I think it's my biggest mistake since a long time...

 

But I find it curious that scientific datas are so important for you and you absolutly ask for proofs, while it seems you're more likely to use your common sense instead of referring to scientific studies :

"I think", "I don't ever remebering " , "Maybe my memory is failing me.", "Personally" " Theoretically" "should be" "I guess", "I geuss" "but this is not something I know for a fact." "Don't know much about it honestly"...

 

At least you're being honnest, lol.

 

Well first of all, I accept you apologies and I don't think it was a "big" mistake at all . It's an easy mistake since we've never even met. I'm really bad at remembering names and faces.

The first three phrases you quoted from me was because you made a mistake and it confused me so I find it weird that you even include them. But you are right, I am being honest about things, it is one of the things I take most pride in. Unlike you and RawVgn I don't say that I "know" stuff that I can't back up and I make a clear difference between personal experience/theories etc and science/facts. If you guys would start doing the same thing it would save us a lot of hassle. This discussion started because RawVgn said that the raw diet is optimal, that's when I reacted. If he would have said "my personal experience is that the raw diet is optimal" I wouldn't even have cared.

 

 

Insted of acting like an asshole just send me a link.

Asked so politely... It's strange but I don't want to. Looks like you'll have to search by yourself.

 

Sarcasm doesn't suit you and I didn't really ask that time dude. I asked at first since you said you could back it up and implied that it was basic knowledge. Insted of doing what I asked you to you started acting like a complete moron by talking down to me for not having the same "knowledge" (you still haven't put up any evidence of this) as you.