I am going to write this down as the argument which trumps all other arguments.Mr Reasonable wrote:
Look, you're just wrong.
Your deduction, as always, is spot on, Mr. Holmes.Turd wrote:Your always posting on medical stuff Pandora, and are by no means smart enough to be a doctor. You claimed to of bought equipment off Alibaba. Are you a RN, or a Dietician? I'm leaning towards dietician, cause you don't seem smart enough to be a RN. That would make you a fat dietician. Some of the most attractive women I've known have been dieticians, but I've also seen some piglets. It is one of the few jobs you really don't wanna be a chubby doing face to face work in.
Turd Ferguson wrote:Stop being the typical ESFJ bitch jumping on the gang up bandwagon. Your a moderator, you have a higher standard to live up to, these tactics are beneath you.
still trying it, I see.. I don't fit any of those ESFJ descriptions, but I might join that forum.. thanks for the linkhttps://intjforum.com/topic/12741-esfjs/
MagsJ wrote:Is that why those South American ancients were crazy as fuck? their maize-heavy diet.. not a trustworthy temperament at all.
The Aztecs practiced ritualistic cannibalism. Victims, usually prisoners of war, were sacrificed in public on top of temples and pyramids by cutting out their hearts. The bodies were then thrown down to the ground where they were dismembered. The pieces were then distributed to the elite, which were mostly warriors and priests. The meat was consumed in the form of stews flavored only with salt and eaten with corn tortillas, but without the otherwise ubiquitous chili.
In the late 1970s the anthropologist Michael Harner suggested that the Aztecs had resorted to large-scale, organized cannibalism to make up for a supposed protein deficiency in the diet. This idea gained limited support from some scholars, but has been shown to be based on unfounded assumptions about eating habits, agriculture and demographics, making it a highly unlikely scenario.
Pandora wrote:That diet is pretty hard, actually. It might be easier to transition from paleo to keto than, say, meditarranean or vegetarian to keto. The carb reduction is pretty drastic on that one; 20g of carbs sounds a lot but it's not, and it adds up really quick. You eat 2 avocados or half a banana and you're pretty much done for the day for carbs. Many dairy products have carbs in them too. If you read labels or analyze nutritional values of every day foods you will find hidden carbs just about everywhere, even in foods that are not supposed to have them. And it's amazing just how carb/sugar/insulin dependent we are as a society. If you're on keto (or even paleo) and go to grocery store, for example, you automatically have to eliminate 80% of food in the store, as you're pretty much reduced to meat/dairy/vegetable section, and don't even bother the middle isles since most of it is carbs and sugar. The studies on keto seem to point out that this diet is easier to transition for men than for women. Female bodies are noted to produce a slightly higher hormonal stress response (cortisol production) while in ketogenic adaptation period. It's supposedly only temporary but the effect is still more pronounced in women. Increase in cortisol production in females may also throw reproductive hormones out of balance and mess with menstrual cycle. You may be right in that carb cycling may be a safer strategy for women, although I wouldn't be surprised if there are pretty hardcore keto females out there, like this keto girl (she looks great for 47, by the way).
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot]