Again with the carb cycling - right or wrong?

(Bunny) #81

I have no idea what the circumstances are about the scurvy you mention because that is not the topic of the thread although interesting and would love to look into that further later. Thank you for the mention.

(Polly) #82

Thanks @PaulL lovely talk from Stephen Phinney.

(Peter) #83

Indeed. Why youā€™re continually allowed to continue spreading confusion via gobbledygook and scraped links is a mystery.

(Bunny) #84

Yet you continually provide no information to show that Iā€™m ā€œspreading confusionā€ so your pretty up the creek without a paddle?

Prove it?

Iā€™m right here ready to read your research?

Let me help you:

ā€œRed Meat does not cause cancer because who said what?ā€

ā€œResistant Starch is not a required essential nutrient because who said what?ā€œ

Personally Iā€™m observing three dead people after 20 years of eating meat and fat with no resistant starch and seeing under a microscope resistant starch not allowing the angiogenesis of cancer cells to kill the human being; more specifically gastrointestinal type cancers from eating red meat?

What do you have?

Nothing? Nada? Zero? Zilch?

(Elmo) #85

You donā€™t have a case. We know that fat and proteins are essential macronutrients for human beings.

Because itā€™s different from fat and protein.

(Bunny) #86

I donā€™t disagree with that, just as resistant starch is an essential sugar or nutrient for your gut microbes to prevent the many ways red meat causes cancer in your gut!

Remember there are no essential foods, only essential nutrients!

(Elmo) #87

But in no way have you proven this. You could as well be stomping your feet and insisting that The Flying Spaghetti Monster exists. Itā€™s all in the realm of myth and fantasy, as opposed to the need that humans have for fat and protein.

(Bunny) #88

You still have not provided no proof to support your conclusions of your side of the evidence?

Instead you go on about nothing really, as if you are attempting to educate me :rofl::joy::rofl::joy: on things that are not really relevant to what is being discussed specifically?

(Elmo) #89

You have to make your case in the beginning. Nobody needs to do anything - youā€™re just talking about fantasy and myth. If you seriously take issue with protein and fat being essential for people, that would be a thing where people could provide plenty of proof. The ball is in your court about starch, but you have no case.

(Bunny) #90

I have no issue with what your stating and have no idea where your getting that from? ā€¦lol

That has nothing to do with what we are discussing, seriously, think before you write? :joy::rofl::joy::rofl::rofl:

(Elmo) #91

Youā€™re being deliberately obtuse. The point is that if you wanted proof that protein and fat are essential for people, it could easily be provided. I donā€™t think you disagree about fat and protein - surely you understand that proof, there, is available.

Yet you are unable to make the same kind of case for starch. On this forum, I would think that 99% or more of the people understand that we can make our own glucose, i.e.

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #92

All right, folks. This thread is getting acrimonious and is now closed.

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) closed #93