Comments by "justgivemethetruth" (@justgivemethetruth) on "Joe Rogan Experience #1393 - James Wilks u0026 Chris Kresser - The Game Changers Debate" video.

  1. 18:14 - It seems odd that looking at this slide Rogan and Kresser are so slow to see that you cannot add the no correlation to the negative correlation and then claim it is all negative correlation to cancer. That is just weird.
    7
  2. 8:19 - basically the consensus over time as we get better at science, against industry influence and bribery is pro-plant-based.
    3
  3. 33:32 - Why would dairy cause prostate cancer and no other cancer? Chris Kesser makes this point, and even says it is a red flag for a bad study ... is it a fair one? I'm not a doctor or an expert but I've heard that the cancer follows the inflammation. It started when they recognized that chimney sweeps in England got cancer because of the carcinogens they were exposed to on their skin. Smokers get lung cancer. People with GERD get cancer of the esophagus. It doesn't mean that inflammation would not cause other cancers, but primarily cancers that touch the organs that are inflamed. Kesser seems to be saying the opposite. With dairy, maybe it is not the dairy itself that causes inflammation, assume that for the sake of argument, but it could cause obesity or other problems that cause secondary or related inflammations? Is that possible?
    2
  4.  @domspern  I've had reservations about 100% plant based, but there was the study in the documentary that made the point, or the claim, that the only diet shown to reverse cardiovascular disease was the 100% plant based diet, and that eating even a little meat does not reverse and can even preventing recovery from cardiovascular disease. I am just going from memory of the doc that I watched last night. Did I get that wrong?
    2
  5.  @wetestap  Except that the failure of other non-plant-based diets to reverse CVD points to that. I agree with you none of the study methods available to us today will prove this conclusively, and I am skeptical of Dr Esselstyn's work, though I hope he is on to something. To me the data are starting to add up to being what they say it is, and my personal anecdotal experience is that I feel better when I eat very little meat/animal products. Also my lab tests seem to have better numbers when I have been eating near vegetarian.
    2
  6.  @timothys9288  Because it tastes good, there is nutritional value to it, and in a world of vegetation that humans mostly cannot eat, other animals such as cows, goats, etc can convert into human absorbable nutrition. Tim, I've always been skeptical of these kinds of arguments. Thankfully you bolster it with some actual claims .... > cholesterol and growth promoting proteins that can promote heart disease and cancer in middle-aged and older humans. Has it been proven? There is still milk, cheese, yogurt, butter, cottage cheese, ice cream, etc. Millions and millions of people have been eating this stuff for a very long time, and if there is a risk or association to cancer it must be very small. The other thing, and forgive me if a flame a bit is that I am tired of being told by people, and I would never tell anyone else "Do some research in this area" ... and by god I think people say that are assholes, because what it does is implicitly assume the other person is stupid, and that all the "research" points in one direction. Your hand-waving at "research" in the abstract is logically invalid, and packed with condescension and arrogance. This is what really sets off carnivores and tends to let them think all vegan arguments are bad, and gives them a bad taste to even engaging in conversation about the subject. "Do some research" is the chickenshit's way to say you're stupid ... and that bounces right back on them because they are the ones who look stupid. If you want to cite facts or conjecture, or even just speculation ... that is one thing if you label it honestly.
    1
  7. Sorry, but I have to say listening to this is tedious. Good debate, but almost 4 hours ... geesh!
    1
  8. 3 hours? ( with commercials )
    1
  9.  @HarryFunmaker  I thought he got it right, it was Joe and Kesser that either did not get the point or were obfuscating ... but they also had a point that the ... I think about 3% more of studies that showed a correlation than those that showed an inverse correlation.
    1
  10. 1:12:18 - Argh, this Chris Kesser guy just seems like such a troll most of the time.
    1
  11.  @wetestap  maybe you can address domspern's comments better than me. That was my understanding too.
    1
  12. It seems like for the purposes of this argument that the onus should be on Chris Kresser to prove that there is a need for meat, that is that there is something you can only get from eating meat. Aside from what people have been raised with and what their tastes are and what they like.
    1