#1393 - James Wilks & Chris Kresser - The Game Changers Debate

Dec 5, 2019

James Wilks is a retired mixed martial artist. He was the winner of Spike TV's The Ultimate Fighter: United States vs. United Kingdom. He is also a producer of the documentary "The Game Changers" on Netflix. Chris Kresser, M.S., L.Ac is a globally recognized leader in the fields of ancestral health, Paleo nutrition, and functional and integrative medicine. Link to notes from this podcast by Chris Kresser: http://kresser.co/gamechangers

Play Episode

Hello friends this episode the podcast is brought to you by brave brave is the web browser reimagined keeping your personal information private as you surf the web we're living in a surveillance economy and every time you download a web page you're not just downloading the content like the text and the images you're also downloading privacy invading trackers in many popular media sites have over a hundred trackers on every page you're being profiled and tracked across the web and so

so what man well it can find they can find out so much about you your inferred sexual orientation political views religious beliefs what kind of medical issues you might have includes what you're reading what you watching what you listening to it includes you location sometimes right up to the exact GPS coordinates

but there's a way to protect yourself and remove the surveillance economy you can start using brave brave stops data grabbing trackers and creepy ads from following you o'clock across the web that allows you to browse up to six times faster than with other browsers because there's not all that bullshit running so stop allowing the surveillance economy to take advantage of you listeners of this podcast head over get Brave today it's easy to import your bookmarks

with chrome you can just do one click and in less than 60 seconds you'll be enjoying a better internet it's free and all your Chrome extensions work in Brave so head on over to Brave.com Rogan and switch now that's Brave.com Rogan to switch now switch to Brave this is one yesterday was about big Tech today is about us I feel like I should read that one like a sappy boyfriend

but it's a dope browser it's great idea we are also brought to you

oh CBD MD that's right they have great shit they have great CBD oils they have gummies if you're into CBD gummies and and topicals for like if you have like muscle pain she like that and they also have the thing called CBD p.m. it helps you unwind after a long day and relax it Blends 500 milligrams of high-quality CBD with melatonin valerian root

meal and other sleep promoting ingredients they even spelled out chamomile like the phonetic cam a meal like that's a simple one like if someone does know a camel is do you really want them selling your CBD

I'm a chamomile snob anyway it helps you sleep and to make it even easier for you to try CBD p.m. or any of CBD MD's premium CBD oil products and I can't say enough about how much I enjoy them I love CBD I think it's just so important for health I think it's great for alleviation of anxiety it's great for sore joints it's just a really nice inflammation reducing product that a lot of people with arthritis

so found some real relief including my good friend Dave Foley from Newsradio he told me that his hands got way better after he started taking regular CBD while I think he takes a hundred milligrams a day anyway to make it easier for you to try CBD p.m. or any of CBD MD's premium CBD oil products they're offering listeners is podcast twenty percent off your next order when you use the promo code Rogan at checkout so that CBD MD

dot-com and use the promo code Rogan for 20% off your purchase of high-quality CBD oil what can I say that CBD oil products from CB D MD CBD MD don't worry about it that's their thing that's what they say that's there that everybody has a catchphrase

how long before people make a fake catchphrase just to see if I'll say it and make it really stupid they're probably trolling me already

Tom Tom Tom

we're also brought to you by the mother fucking cash app the guys who make this at for sure troll me because it says in there the motherfucking cash app they want to know if I'll say they even add other things that I say it's kind of weird a little game we play

I love this company though and one of the things I love about this company is there not just an excellent application the number one app in finance in the app store for a reason it's great it allows you to buy and sell Bitcoin you can send and money back and forth with your friends and you can also buy stock with it cash app investing is the newest way

and unlike other bitch ass investing tools that only let you buy entire shares of stock cash app will let you instantly start investing with as little or as much as you want so because some stocks could cost hundreds of dollars if not thousands per share

but now you can still own a piece of a stock with as little as one dollar Stock Investing is now so easy

that I could do it cash app is also the easiest way for you to buy Bitcoin so what the fuck you waiting for a brokerage services are provided by cash app investing a subsidiary of square and a member of s IPC now here's where what I love the most about the company

when you download the cash app and enter the referral code Joe Rogan all one word Joe Rogan spelled all together the cash app will send $10 to my good friend Justin Ren's fight for the Forgotten charity they're making Wells for the pygmies in the Congo it's a beautiful thing and on top of that you will also receive $10 you can't go wrong you fucks so don't forget promo code Joe Rogan when you download the cash app from the app store or the Google Play store today

the podcast today is between James Wilkes he was one of the producers of the game changers and Chris Kresser who debunked the game changers in the last podcast that I had with him I'd known James Wilkes from The Ultimate Fighter and from the UFC have a great deal of respect for him as a martial artist and although we don't agree on everything we found out through this podcast that we agree on a lot and there was a lot that I learned

myths that I had held preconceived ideas of what is true about the the science of nutrition and like James was super prepared I mean I don't want to spoil alert it too much but he made some very very good points I don't want to say what we all disagreed on but it was way less than you would think he's a great guy and I want to thank Chris Kresser for doing this as well because you know it's these are hard these are not these kind of conversations are costly

lie to your to your brain but I think we got a lot out of this and I know I certainly did so I appreciate them both very much please welcome James Wilkes and Chris Kresser

check it out The Joe Rogan Experience trained by day Joe Rogan podcast by night all day all right here we go first of all welcome James I really appreciate you having me on my pleasure and welcome again Chris so this is essentially giving you an opportunity to refute some of the things that Chris has said about your film we should tell everybody that you the producer of The Game Changers is one of them one of one or two people

sirs I know you also from of course from The Ultimate Fighter you have C and Chris this is your what fourth appearance yeah like that with our fifth fourth or fifth did you get a chance to see what Chris had said yeah I've watched you watch it okay well I made a bunch of notes excellent let's start from the beginning the beginning of the show the beginning of your film you talked about the Gladiators and all that stuff and the the fact that you were shocked to find out that they they had eaten a vegetarian diet

it yeah I mean you know that's been misrepresented right so even before the film came out people are like oh there's this vegan film coming out it's freaking propaganda people were judging the film before they'd seen it right and the vegan sort of community really pushed it like a look at this documentary so there's been things saying they claim that the Gladiators were vegan right and if we can just prove I think the whole film is based on this premise that was just like an inciting incident from you start digging into it first of all Fabian can't said they were predominantly vegetarian and I

said they eat mostly plants and that is what I couldn't believe right no they wouldn't claim they were vegan didn't even claiming over vegetarian they're just peeled mostly by plants you know people say oh you cherry-picked one location it was the only known Gladiator burial site in the world based on archaeological and anthropological data at the time as our time we you read the study because there have been other studies while this because when that some they've been questioned so like there's one in York there's one in New York at the time they had a few glad skeletons it was questioned whether that was the thing but I'm happy to address

every could take but if you wouldn't mind I just want to make sure that Chris Brown on the same page about how evidence is evaluated sure so it could would you consider yourself a nutrition expert

no I would consider myself someone who is adapted reading the literature and learning from experts in nutrition medicine anthropology Etc although I do have Masters Level Training in nutrition okay so it is it fair to say that any one study cannot show what you know the human race should be eating is that fair anyone's that absolutely so basically any time you show a study if you say something

to give a citation for it right yeah I've had to say and then someone can claim it as cherry-picked is that you've got to show a study or some studies and then someone can claim is cherry-pick great so what we have to do in order to understand nutrition is look at the totality of the evidence and I want to make sure we're on the same page and then we can address each critique of that's okay so sure that is that core of my argument right exactly so you would say is it fair to say like there's three main areas so they'd be like preclinical data which would either be an animals or in test tubes petri dishes right that'd be observational data where you

look at people and see how they're doing and obviously there's the health user but healthy user bias potential and there's Interventional trials right so let's just take trans fats for example right you you look in a Petri dish that endothelial cells and trans fats and you can see that it creates vascular information in those cells right and then you look at people to eat more trans fats and they have high levels of information and then you can actually do Interventional randomized control trials and you can tell that trans fats cause inflammation so we'd

you'll agree that trans fats are bad based on all of those data points is that fat all right so therefore again if you start any one study people can just someone can just claim that you're cherry-picking right you can just say check if everyone can say that I could say that you're jabbing you can see I'm cherry picking not necessarily because there are many analyses and reviews that are built for this purpose I agree look at the totality of evidence totally agree here in the film for example pointing to many meta-analyses that summarize all of the research that's been done on the topic

that I wouldn't have said that that's cherry-picking fair enough I agree with that okay so basically in philosophy there's this is a logical fallacy called appeal to Authority right but in the real world you know you have to look at experts that are specialists in their field so if I you know I just got shoulder surgery not long ago right so I went to shoulder surgeon I didn't go to dentist if I want to learn about comedy or you know finding out tonight come and talk to you right if I want to learn about acupuncture or understand team or I might come to Chris because

you've got a master's degree in which traditional Oriental medicine you are licensed acupuncturist right so if I want to learn about that Chris is someone that I might want to go to so what I'm saying is the World Health Organization the FAO the American Heart Association the to 2015-2020 dietary guidelines are all suggesting to eat predominantly plant-based diets right and they're saying that vegetarian and vegan diets are healthier for all life stages including for pregnancy and childbirth so through childbirth

breastfeeding adolescents athletes and so on okay that's it that's the general consensus can I just finish the job okay and so and I've got a bunch of slides if you don't believe anything I've got a bunch of slide showing the position papers for all of these okay skip through that so that's you'd agree that those yes it wouldn't necessarily agree okay so then let's go to recommendation okay so can we go to slide one those recommendations change over time to time and then I would also say that I'm on a predominantly plant-based diet

exactly if you look at and what are we arguing if you look at two-thirds of my plate is plants well this is my point you know you're being unfair that's really unfair because last time you point it out the totality of coverage of the plate is not reflective of the calories you said that on the bananas know what he is talking about what is predominantly his diet it's implants you gotta be some calories it's always on the the we need to be sitting on calories if you're saying that your diet is predominantly plant-based then either

the one we're on the same page right because that's what I'm talking about we're not because that's the main question here in my mind is whether there is evidence that supports being on a 100% plant-based diet with no animal products versus a diet that includes a lot of plant foods and some animal Foods I thought you were back in the film which was talking about plant-based diets so plant-based diets means getting the vast majority of the calories from Plants well limiting or excluding other Foods

the film essentially was all about only eating plants know okay so he was no recognition whatsoever about eating animal products will kill you dairy products will kill you all cleanses like cigarettes foods not know that claim was never made see but there was a connection do it was not there was the third connection are there was not just what was the connection the connection cigarettes was the the way the Playbook that is being used by the Sea that's people are conflating like what the hell Playbook is the same

simply click the same way that using a Fleet and they're using advertising we never made the claim which I'd rather clean that then put be clear so the Playbook that was used by the smoking industry so they pay for studies right right and we know even with food like this has been done the cigarettes it's been done with drugs it's been done with food research shows that industry-funded studies are for too tight four to eight times more likely to have a conclusion in their favor for their product so this is what the smoking industry did

then they got doctors to say that smoking wasn't bad and then they got athlete's the show like hey smoking is good that was the power that we drew we never do the parallel that was drawn in what the hell so I want to make that really clear there was no and I've seen this In Articles saying hey you know they connected me we didn't do that if you watch the film we never said did you why did you have that in there though if you're not saying because they're using the same Playbook if you're not saying that meat causes cancer you're saying we're really seeing the same place Pacific claims that chicken eating

chicken and fish causes cancer eating dairy causes cancer that we quote some doctors vegan doctors and the night vision that's the oath misrepresentation so can I just go back can we just finish the evaluating evidence named entities point was I'm happy to go every critique so basically the consensus and you're saying they're changing over time they are changing because as we get better at signs of becoming more the recommendations becoming more plant-based despite industry influence from studies and marketing and people being paid off by three influence goes both ways the sugar industry in the 60s I agree expose

in the finger at fat and I don't think Isaac Oprah so that's a straw man argument you believe that he's not saying you are saying no no okay industry the sugar industry is terrible and I would agree but can I just leave me just finish the ad valorem evidence but the thing about this section of the film was you were making some sort of a correlation between cigarettes and the way that it was marketed the way they're marking the Raven and the way meat is marketed correct so here it's the same companies like phone number

why would you do you would never do that about like carrots or kale or something predominately healthy but I didn't because I didn't do it but if you're saying that you're connecting the two things you're connecting something that clearly causes cancer cigarettes and these studies that were made to show people that it didn't they were paid off studies were fake there were there were essentially cherry-picked fake studies that were financed by the tobacco industry wrecked in order to get people to buy more cigarettes you're making this same

sort of crime about meet correct which means you think that meat is bad I do okay that's but that's where we're that's where I where now we can disagree about that but I'm almost finished with the evaluating evidence okay so basically what we did when we expert interview the experts is we chose leading experts in their individual fields we collectively with thousands of articles in the peer-reviewed literature right so in this is one of the bombers about the making a documentary is like you put the lower third on people don't get to read it so we had to

the chair of nutrition at Harvard the president American College of Cardiology the lead delegate of Urology of the American Medical Association the chair of anthropology at Harvard the director of energy environment resources at chattin Chatham House really respected so tell me about vegan doctors I saw some of them some are involved in hunting some are involved in animal testing I saw one of them eating a chicken sandwich at lunch that the let's not say that like this was a vegan bias coming into it because that's just not true this story we're stretching out

we were talking just about this one section where you connecting cigarettes and meet so you're saying that the same sort of kazoos the same Playbook but there's no evidence that meat is bad for you now we're this is so you can get into that this is something that's actually recently been established by mainstream medicine you understand that right that they've released new studies releasing these new studies saying that there's no longer this concern that red meat causes cancer or that even this is also an appeal to Authority because I can find many illustrious

Arius doctors and experts who are highly qualified that will disagree with no bottom point of view that it that a diet must be a hundred percent plant-based and I didn't say anything okay okay Jen can I just clarify your position okay I want to know what we're actually is bad for you I do you did you but this was the connection that you made with cigarettes in the film no yes no I think that both promoting something bad because there's a profit and so you think that meat is bad for you out there promoting it knowing that it's bad

yes for profit okay sir so all Chris has to do to debunk the film right is convinced the people watching and listening that he knows more about the consensus in the experts in their field like I would understand this is where I'm actually not that interested in consensus of experts I'm looking at that research that is published the peer-reviewed research that is published yeah that's including meta-analyses and even reviews of meta analyses that have been done a perfect example is the whole Darien cancer section totally that we

we talked about where you at argued or Walter Willett argued that there's you know dairy products cause cancer and I pointed to a meta-analyses that looked at over a hundred and fifty different reviews that an 84% of those found no association so how is that not part of this discussion we're we're talking about hundreds of scientists across different continents different countries they're using peer reviewed so the high end so show this but in the movie Just One

expert is pointing to you know one group of studies without mentioning that that sounds disingenuous that point right so this is the 2018 merchandise as if you got a slide for that oh

if not I've got your slide hundred and seven slide hundred and seven know this is a 2019 men until 1953 studies right yeah and I can get I'm really a lot further into it know is that I'm not the only one I love because at nine o'clock last night until nine o'clock last night I thought Chris just made a bunch of mistakes interpreting the data and I'm going to show you how he has misleading people on this study okay so if you can bring up the slide a hundred and seventy

is that can we see the slight yeah put it up okay

is this it okay so you see what he's putting quotes Okay 84% of meta analyses on Dairy consumption should either no association or an inverse association between Dairy and cancer and then you go on to point out what an inverse means is that people ate more Dairy get lower rates of cancer that's what he's implying when you put something in quotes what does that mean to you

means as what he said yeah but it's that quotation is quoting the study right fair enough is that what they said in the study no that's not what they said in the Stony that's right my summary of the evidence of the study right thank you but when you put some in quite that's misleading that's his quote okay fine okay let's go without like that but he's not putting things in quotes anything you do in literature when you put some in quotation marks you're quoting the

let's just let's just bypass that all agree okay so can you bring up side 109 see what they actually said

okay this is the actual quote they don't out of a hundred fifty three reported meta-analyses comparing highest versus lower Dairy consumption 109 71% showed no evidence of a statistically significant association between Dairy consumption and instance of cancers 20 showed a decrease risk of cancers with dairy consumption and 24 showed an increased risk of cancers with their exemption now this is actually until last night I like nine o'clock I realized what he was doing okay if you want to go

I mean just to sum it up you got to slide 110 wait can we stay on here for a second what's your what's your interpretation what do you do you agree that that was the quote from the study absolutely okay good but no I'm asking you what your interpretation it does that in your mind show a strong connection between Dairy and cancer could drive you're going to really realize here what Chris is doing okay this is really and I'm glad that you brought us please answer what I'm saying okay so can I just take the reason you brought this up is because Walter what it said there was a strong connection prostate cancer and Dairy

correct yeah so you brought about something about all cancers okay so and in this study about half of the study showed a connection between prostate cancer and dairy and half didn't write still not a compelling argument that Dariana is associated with cancer okay so can we got you got a coin flip basically right

not we'll move to the next slide and excellent is explaining okay it's just breaking that down okay so there was statistically significant associations between Dairy consumption instead of cancers 71% showed no evidence 13 showed a decrease risk and 16th century an increased risk so you see what Chris did to represent this he added 71 and 13 to make 84 right you follow this is how you got it right

so you added 73 percent seventy one percent and 13 percent to go 84 right so his statement from this study was 84% showed no evidence or a decreased risk that's what he made you believe will 71% shows no evidence the 13% shows decreased risk Circle you add the two of them together it's 84% shows no evidence a group or a decrease regretfully but he could have said is 71 percent plus six teams and that's 87 percent he could have said 87%

no evidence or an increased risks 84 how sensor 1 plus 16 oh so I could make the claim no evidence or a decreased or increased risk for getting really into suggested the burden of proof you were claiming in the film was claiming Dairy causes cancer my claim was there's no the burp the bulk of the evidence suggests there is no association or inverse Association that's true jerks 30% shows no other he's I agree

% shows decreased risk okay so that but hold on a second yeah the decrease risk and the increased risk are almost the same which is have which would have talked about his work which is high 3% shows increase risks and this one's not the point of this study is that this is his study that he brought up showing this is very strong evidence K his statement was very misleading he added up those two and then he finished it up by saying so basically there's an inverse correlation but he did not show he could have said 87% showed no risk or

Kris risk in chat instead he chose to summarize it saying 84 percent but don't know risk in Crete increase risk it sounds different during drought because you're talking about something causing cancer no I exactly and so they couldn't there wasn't shown of things to find the total cancer was increased right but we just we know that as research shows this included did it not industry funded research two-thirds of research is in the right line and we know that re and research shows that are you are you proposing that we throw out every study

because the one of the main studies in your film was sponsored by the Hass avocado board the one with that claims that animal products contribute to inflammation I'm not just incredible I'm not sure that's right now I'm saying that industry-funded studies and by the way industry-funded studies they typically only put them out and it shows in their favorite there's no obligation for industry when they do a study to release it yeah I'm frankly without okay I've written so I searched our what do you think that the industry and the meat and Aaron says far more

all money in the plant-based industry right you'd agree with that

actually we can look at some statistics on that okay good night but Joe I don't know okay would you do would you disagree the industry funded research has a four to eight times increased risk compared to non industry funded research in find inclusions in their favor I think in this I think industry research is definitely a problem but I see it as a problem across the board and I have some statistics and so do you not do not admit that you here led the audience to believe that there was a

actually decrease risk overall you made it sound very high because you didn't split between the no difference that was not my intention it was just it was a summer has a data set because not to spend 10 minutes as we're doing now talking about one study when there's a computer prepared very misleading claim well no it's not a misleading my said any other whateley accurate if they're said showed no evidence or showed an increased risk 84% that is 77% that seems like it's missing either than that would be misleading also you're running like yeah he could

about something causing cancer James exactly so he shouldn't be making a priest risk is what we're looking for what we're looking for is evidence of it causing cancer 71% the bulk of the evidence shows no evidence that's exactly what I've my point if you want and I'm saying you should research it doesn't show that you honestly don't think that that statement instead of just putting the 71% showed no evidence 13% showed that would be in the fairest the most

no honest exponent like summary of that statement I would say that if you wanted to say it the most accurately yes that's the best way to say that 21% showed no evidence 13% show decrease risk but I don't have a problem with saying 84% showed no evidence or a decreased risk true because we're talking about something causing cancer relevant Point that's the relevant point the relevant point is does this study show that Dairy causes cancer the the primary evidence the most of the evidence says it shows no evidence or

has a decreased risk that's the bulk of the bulk of the 84 percent versus 87% it does no no no 87% shows increased risk is only 16 percent to increased risk to get 87% okay let's throw out the note no evidence okay so that out let's throw out know what I would we throw out the burden of proof is to show evidence that indicates that Dairy causes cancer if you do a study and it shows that it doesn't then that's not in support

or of the claim I agree with you I agree on agreeing that the meta-analysis did not could not find an association but I'm also pointing out that industry-funded studies are included in it and they are more likely to find no connection so there's a hundred fifty three studies you are claiming we should just that all of them are industry funded and we should throw out this huge review of a hundred and fifty-three meta-analyses because of Industry funding what is the basis for that claim

now I'm not I'm saying that it's ways the results can you can't see that I don't I don't but you know industry but I don't accept it as a hundred you just III studies you accept it were that they were in this meta analyses that they're going to sway the results to the point where these findings aren't valid and we could do the same thing with this all the studies that you have linked to in the film well we're we can also look at other studies on Dairy and cardio metabolic outcomes that

have fun I got lots of large reviews that we can look at and again anyone can bring up you know this is a pointless discussion to have if you're just going to sit there and say industry funding is my only point out that's not my only point I think we are saying it makes some suspect correct yes and it could have swayed any other guy has the but wait how many how many do you agree with you about the cigarette thing how many of the hundred and fifty-three study meta-analyses which each also had individual studies in them are are so so biased by industry

funding that we can count on the file I would hope that you would know more than I I mean basically you've why should why but why would you know this is a this this we can't get very far in this discussion if you're going to claim that we can't even talk about studies in the peer-reviewed literature because industry funding completely biases the finding no I'm not saying that's the case I'm saying just because they couldn't even though there were more showing an increase in than showed a decrease risk right I am saying that it's possible that they're the

just be fun that's a misleading statement more showed increased then decrease that's Corral but there's 71% showed no he was that all I agree I agree so that's a wash but so nobody wants not even knows too harsh no it's not a wash if you have a hypothesis this thing causes cancer and then you do a ton of studies and there's no association that's a that hypothesis is no longer correct it's not a wall that's actually that's actually not true based on epidemiology if you have 10 studies that show Noah

Association and 10 that show an association the net you don't ask questions you don't have that at all here I'm not again I'm not what he said you have 84% that showed another no or decrease risk which is the opposite you could say 84% showed no evidence and then forget about decreased risk just say 84% showed no evidence forget about decrease risk right you sit still have only 16 percent showed an increased risk right that's what you do in epidemiology study your you have to take into account all the other factors in these persons lives

they've taken about whether they whether they drank whether they smoked Hardware they exercise well you know sedentary lifestyle there's a lot of factors so that would if you had something that was causing cancer you would expect the results to be flipped you would expect the results to be 16% showed no so showed no evidence 71 percent or eighty four percent showed an increase that would be something you'd say hey this is causing cancer this is more likely that's not how I put in all your works or if you if you had weapons

genealogy is slippery and I agree I agree wait how is that not how epidemiology work if you cry if you have even if you had 10 studies showing no evidence just cause you don't find something doesn't mean that it exists okay absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence okay but let's say let's say this if you if you had a hundred studies and 70 of those studies showed an increased risk of cancer when you say that thing causes cancer most likely Mars wow if it was all happening me ology then it's quitting time okay so now let's do a hundred studies and 70% now show no evidence yeah

you say it's most likely that there's no evidence no that's not how it works oh how does it how does it work so if you've got 70 studies that couldn't couldn't show a correlation and 30% that did that is still in favor of showing that there is a correlation would no no no certain when I would now we're doing 70 state if 70% 70% of the people in these studies if you have all these Studies have a hundred studies and 70% of the people in all these studies are showing an increased risk of cancer we would agree right this is why you can't prove causation based on

optional book sure you would agree this is just slightly right now if it's reversed now 70% of these studies show there's no increased risk of cancer or 84 percent or eighty four percent which is because you adding the decrease risk when we're driving adding the decrease risk which shows that you're less likely to get cancer which is almost the same as an increased risk of cancer which in my eyes is a wash you would assume that we're talking about something that doesn't give you cancer

well I mean that I agree that this study found that there were they couldn't prove causation right over couldn't prove a link between Cancer and you made it out like he was being deceptive is being deceptive I don't agree with that I don't agree with that because you're trying but you're trying to show that these studies are proving or at least making this correlation between consumption of dairy products and cancer but the evidence doesn't show that if you want to look at it in its entirety the evidence shows that most of the 71%

no evidence of it causing cancer 13% showed it's actually better for you you have less risk of cancer that not eating dairy 13% and in particular showed increased risk of cancer and again when you talk about epidemiology studies when you're talking about you know 16 out of a hundred you have to throw and all the other factors and that's why they didn't find it but you can I just the reason you brought this up as prostate cancer right and and so if you look at slide 113 price

State cancer was that's disturbing so it's 50/50 with dairy consumption versus that's not once I won 13 but a lot of people get prostate cancer too isn't that an also an issue that's a high as one person isn't that a high risk for males prostate cancer yes it's a high one whether they were 112 whether they consume milk or not

so interested in this mattress that you point to the highest connection that they could find between Dairy and any type of cancer it was prostate cancer so if you look at the black line that shows no association if you look at the green line that's decreased Association and the red line was increased Association that was the meta-analysis that you provided yeah so you brought you brought this 30 up because dr. Walter Willett who is the chair of nutrition at Harvard he's one of the most published nutrition scientists of all time if not the most published a disagreement

right and so he is coming to the demonstration that prostate cancer is length and it's likely that it's causal and there's very slowly back up half and half that's not that I don't know how it ends of a causal relationship games there's no evidence not a causal relationship okay dr. Walter will it is in just about any type of partner steady yeah there's an appeal to Authority you just said yourself that's a rhetorical fallacy now it's cute it's a it's a it's a fallacy unless it's the appeal to

valid Authority because literally if I want to know about you saying like so if I want lesson we look at mixed martial arts and Chris goes well I've never done mixed martial arts but I think I know more about anthropology nutrition like I know more about boxing kickboxing Jiu-Jitsu and wrestling so we're talking about the consensus we're talking about leading experts in their field with thousands of peer-reviewed will bring census there are experts who were raised contrary illustrious who would disagree and would look at this study and reach the same

exact conclusion right I did same response there's no reliable no there's no reliable proven connection between Dairy and prostate you have half studies showing an association half studies showing no association not to mention the fact that that's as you just said that even if there was a strong correlation that doesn't prove causation what this was my faster you said you liked this because it included all surrounding much control trials yeah and I think should we should we trust Walter Willett who

the time was the chairman of the trust is studies of inferences made in the film whether you're a were intentional or not and your part that you know Dairy people are hearing Odair he's going to cause prostate cancer they're going to extend that to cancer there are other claims in the film made about Dairy and metabolic prop issues and saturated fat metabolic issues

use so the operative question that I'm trying to answer is do the data support that not does Walter Willett think that or any other expert in the film do the data support that conclusion right and I didn't even in that study it the data don't strongly support that if you have half study saying yes half study saying no that's not a clear signal and it's definitely not evidence of a causal relationship so so having Walter Willett or anyone say there's a strong relationship

and we know the mechanism and there's you know it's causal that can I pause here this sponsored by the study can I possibly didn't you tell me that two thirds of people have an intolerance towards towards milk until it's Dairy and I have a study here is that what the number is it's why not two out of three people in the world okay so can I show this because this is actually to your points from so two out of three people have an intolerance towards dairy in the world and if you're talking about

study that shows 50% of the people in these studies that are consuming Dairy there's a correlation between prostate cancer and Derek wouldn't you assume that maybe the same thing that we're talking about with two-thirds of people are intolerant to something they consume this thing that's in tolerated causes inflammation in the body and that inflammation in the body could possibly be leading to cancer correct no not cracked dairy dairy is inversely associated with inflammation

so we could eat okay inverse associated with inflammation but if people are irritated by Dairy if they have an intolerance to Dairy and you said two-thirds of people here's here's what I would suspect there that if you we segmented those people out and said let's do a study find out who's intolerant of dairy and find out who isn't you would see even better results for dairy because despite the fact that some people are lactose intolerant we're still seeing in that meta-analyses that you know

most people there's no association in most cases and inverse Association in other cases so that James was supposed to answer things hold on a second but this prostate cancer thing is not most why is this 50/50 right no and but why did you have to imagine what you're saying you're saying if half of the okay what if Dairy gives half people cancer right and doesn't have ever had cancer and I can just drink Dairy second of all you see what Christians did that's not what that's Ted but you see what you think he's our epidemiology James it's not dairy gives anyone cancer its Association or that's me

he's a real meta-analysis included running my Styles well this is actually to you the can I stop this though wouldn't if someone's intolerant of something that means your body is irritated by means it causes some sort of disturbance right whether it's inflammation or gastrointestinal disorder you start farting and that's what happens when people are lactose intolerant right that irritates the body wouldn't there be wouldn't you assume that something your body is intolerant to would possibly be the cause of

disruption or disease certainly could be right so now if everybody if you're looking at two thirds of the population are intolerant so why would that cause prostate cancer and other cancers I don't know it doesn't make sense when you see that kind of thing in the data it's a red flag because there's no logical explanation for why it would cause prostate cancer but no other cancer I think about guys they're more of an association there

there with with that Jamie pull up but just Google dairy products and inflammation review of the clinical evidence this is a review systematic review of 52 clinical trials and they found that dairy products were inversely associated with inflammatory markers which means that people who consume Dairy actually had lower levels of inflammatory markers so the hypothesis that Dairy is inflammatory and that's why it's causing cancer doesn't seem to hold up in the literature so so can I just say that so first of all you know there's

- studies he can bring up I'm not even intrusion sign this I'm looking like a combatives trainer right and so you also said that you're not an expert in nutrition and so what we have to believe today is that Chris really is it is about the meta-analyses but it's about meta-analyses it's about the totality of opinion can all the evidence not just one meta-analysis or a meta-analysis were meta-analyses but all of the data and so what you're asking people to believe is that you are better at interpreting the data than people that are experts in their field now you're welcome Annie

a experts who would agree with me no no I just didn't refuse to interview them in the film no actually we did interview something I can tell you about in a second on the other side not to be why we didn't include them but you are asking people I would understand it if suddenly Chris has figured out this new trevore diet that he figures out something about nutrition that he's better than the consent he knows more about the consensus and more about the majority of leading experts but to believe that Chris knows more about anthropology Urology heart disease new wine client apology because

because that when you try them try to do you have anthropology and and successfully because just a majority of anthropologists agree with what I said you chose the probably one of the few that would agree with the idea that humans primarily ate a plant you know exclusively plant-based diet for most of human evolution we can go into that again I'm actually representing the consensus view point and anthropology James and I don't be hard you'd be hard-pressed not to find a

this group of experts that agree with that idea so you're saying that the chat you're saying that Richard wrangham the chair of anthropology that we interviewed does not represent the scientific consensus of anthropology if you're arguing that he is saying that humans primarily eat plant-based diet for end didn't and animal products were not a significant part of our diet through Evolution then yes that's what I'm saying it depends so we came from the equator right but only I want to go back a second because the only answer the only to answer you guys are you arguing that

there's a dominant consensus among nutrition experts in the u.s. that everyone should be on a vegan diet no so what's the uh what's the argument here that we should people should eat plants and my argument is yes they should and and animal products can also be part of that new trevore healthy Amna omnivorous diet and I think you would find a dominant consensus of nutrition experts it agree with that so it should be but

that's not the way this film is being interpreted this because there was a bias going interest so for example when you go to the US military right the game changes is the first documentary that has ever been accredited by the defense health agency for the Department of Defense it's the first documentary that has ever been supported by the Special Operations Medical Association they didn't come into it looking at the science this has been evaluated by hundreds of PhD researchers to come to that conclusion okay they will not leave it how so they've been evaluated

oh so you can't get an accreditation your film is being evaluated by the Department of Defense health agency of the Department of Defense which decides what the military is eating they don't give a crap about oh let's let's base their diets on ever on Evolution they care on what is the science and the doc game changes the first documentary has ever been accredited by the defense health agency they didn't look at this and go okay this is a vegan propaganda film they why are you saying that hundreds of phds have reviewed this and review

because data in it to come to this conclusion and is this proven is this printed is this some published paper where it shows hundreds of people have reviewed this film and found all the claims to be credible and that all the debunking zuv it or not the defense health agency has reviewed this film in detail digging into each of the studies right but you're saying you again called to Authority you're saying hundreds of phds of have studied this who are these people well there's a lot from the defense health agency there's a lot of people especially operations

organization that came to the decision these are masters degrees in nutrition phds in nutrition to get that accreditation that just hasn't happened before because they didn't come into it thinking this is a vegan propaganda film that was a bias going into it we're again talking a lot about experts and their plants right unless experts and their opinions and not criss cross around his opinion it's not that that's enough representation is no this is not about my opinion and I we can

the room with experts who agree with me you had an expert a debate with a doctor in the UK on a TV show who disagreed with you we can always try and we can always find people who agree and disagree with all kinds of different credentials it's disingenuous to claim like I said I'm not here to argue that plants are unhealthy and that we shouldn't be eating a lot of plants this is the fallacy that gets created with these kinds of films

and it's not a choice between a standard American diet crappy processed food diet that contains meat or a vegan diet right it's there is a possibility of a plant-based diet a diet has a lot of plants that also contains animal products and that compares to comparing that with a 100% plant-based diet that is the operative question about the film the film is I believe that meat and dairy a bad view the film talked about plan besides you believe that

I think there's sufficient Capital let's talk about that because that you look at our website and telling you know people want to know the resources on what to eat they say we say it's all or something it doesn't have to be all or nothing so we were talking about it but that's nice but what you just said you think that meat is bad for you yeah please and dairy and you know black yeah I can see the argument if we're talking about two-thirds of people being lactose intolerant I would see the argument that for two-thirds of people

he's probably not good for you that doesn't it doesn't support that but if it but I mean we came back and what is lactose intolerant if you're intolerant of something that means your body's not enjoying it and that's not the only issue by the way that's not the only issue with milk okay let's just concentrate on that yeah that's a giant number two thirds of people are lactose intolerant if you if your body is intolerant of something but you keep consuming that thing that your body isn't our enough I would naturally assume as a absolute admitted non-expert that that's not good so two things here

are number one I've always four years have written a dairy is very individual and depends on your tolerance number two there are a lot of dairy products with virtually no lactose in them so cheese for example hard cheeses no lactose you no cream No Lack very little lactose butter very no lactose guinot lactose yogurt fermented dairy products like kefir no lactose so while I agree with what you're saying if someone is lactose intolerant they should avoid dairy products

contain lactose when you look at the studies on Dairy and connections with conditions like cancer inflammation which I just pointed out with this study and you look at Cardio metabolic outcomes which I'd like to cover because that includes heart disease and diabetes and overweight obesity Etc there is not any strong evidence that Dairy contributes to those conditions so let's let's look at those actual studies Chris what you talk really badly against epidemiology training can't prove causation

Asian and then when you like it you cite it so you'll give epidemiological evidence same way with you James I'm sorry both ways that's right so you can if the burden of proof if you're claiming that something is bad for you yeah the burden of proof is on you Sean mannion so you can't say it's bad for you and then I show epidemiological studies and rcts by the way that were included in that meta-analyses that don't support that and then you say oh we can't trust the research I'm sorry

he is saying that you say that you said the epidemiology that's observational studies just looking at people you have said that we can't rely on those and then you then cite them yourself

I didn't say we can't rely on epidemiology I say you have to consider the caveats it with epidemiology but again the burden of proof if you're claiming that a food is bad for you the burden of proof is on you to show research that it is for example for example first of all there's an inflammatory mediators for example like heme iron second of all we look at population data and we show increased causes of morbidity and mortality

for people that eat less meat or the eat no meat so there's increased causes of morbidity you just said it the wrong way so your decreases decrease risk of more morbidity and mortality let's just be real clear on that because you said it wrong and I'm so that everybody can say for example let's look at two randomized controlled trials see these are not observational studies the the first found that increasing red meat consumption by replacing carbohydrates in the diet of individuals without any me

it actually reduced markers of inflammation Todd we're just replacing what sorry carbohydrates yes what is that sorry so Jamie if you want to pull this I mean these are all on website Kresser dot c-- o-- / game changers but that study is called increased lean red meat intake does not Elevate markers of oxidative stress and inflammation in humans

I believe the study exist I mean that doesn't say these are rcts randomized so they're actually controlling it instead of just looking at observational data which is subject to healthy user bias which is there a DVR CT so that's that's one study and then there's another one another RCT in women with anemia inflammation markers on a diet high in red meat were not significantly different from those on a diet high in oily fish and then there are also numerous

studies of paleo diets but which contain meat and other types of animal protein and show that they decrease markers of inflammation including CRP there's randomized controlled trial showing reductions and interleukin 6 and also in tumor necrosis Factor Alpha in these diets so all of this suggests it's not the meat it's what you eat with the meat that makes the difference so we have studies of chlorophyll eating chlorophyll rich green vegetables decreases

the formation of n nitroso compounds with me you'll have lots of studies showing that when you eat plants along with the meat then you don't see the effects that you might see if you're just eating right all perhaps standard American diet a great story off sex like some so if an animal Foods creates oxidative stress you have it with the plant foods and that would have the antioxidants and that would offset it is that basically it's a little more complicated than yeah I think it is more complicated than that but what I can do

as I said last time and as I've always argued I'm not a proponent of Carnage the carnivore diet I'm not a low-carb guy I'm not a keto guy I'm my fundamental argument is just that the optimal human diet contains both plant and animal foods and this focus on individual food components or macro nutrients like protein or fat or carbohydrate we've gotten too much it's called nutrition is

MM it's just focusing on these individual elements and ignoring the overall pattern of diet quality which is the most important thing and that's what a lot of the more recent studies are showing when you look at the diet pattern and diet quality on its Aunt you know overall that's what actually makes a difference in terms of health and life span not how much of this fat how much of that fat whether there's you know red meat or white meat or fish or whatever it's the pattern let me toss it because this is one of the

primary misconceptions that people have about consuming meat when they hear studies that say that meat is associated with mortality or high cholesterol or heart disease are all these different factors we are talking about these kinds of studies where people fill out a form tell us what you eat yeah that do you how many days a week do you eat meat how many days a week do you eat this what they don't take into account is whether or not these people are going to Wendy's whether or not they're eating a grass-fed steak and and and you know and bra

luckily something healthy there's a giant difference between those two things but there are lumped in together because this is meat consumption of the the studies aren't perfect for sure but you were saying that race you're looking saying we should look at outcomes and not just look at individual markers right is that basically no I'm saying we should look at the diet quality the overall diet pattern so for example Christopher Gardner did the study at Stanford a couple of years ago and he took two instead of

saying you know low fat low carb he took two groups any advise them all to basically eat a healthy diet and then one group ate a low fat healthy diet and the other group a to low carb healthy diet they all lost weight but it wasn't that big of a difference between the two I agree I agree so first of all in terms of health I would be putting my opinion would be I'm pretty much micronutrient agnostic so I wouldn't like I'm not advocating high carb or low carb I think that people can do healthy and well I think for athletes they need a lot more carbs and of course getting those

as from Plants I think there's certain athletes that can if it's slow and steady state where you're getting more fat oxidation I think that you know Stone steady-state athletes can do but like an MMA fighter a soccer player basketball player read but you just said that you were you were not low-carb right you said you're not low cop I'm not I'm not a low-carb Advocate I've written articles called 17 7 reasons you should be cautious I'm not saying I'm not Lok a low-carb Advocate I don't

everyone should be on a low carb diet I've never I've never believed her somebody things Chris has his own it doesn't have the consensus definitions of carbohydrate levels you've made up your own definitions right when did I make up my own water system slide 80 Jamie if you do that please

let's just point out the exact bitter the man who I had on the podcast yesterday who holds the world record yeah in running a hundred miles in 11 hours and I think it's 18 minutes he's on a low carbohydrate diet yeah I mean again you can there's so in steady state you can still do well so so Chris your recommendation your definition of low carb is 10 to 15% if you go the next slide dream is 81 so if you look at the peer-reviewed literature it's either less than 30% or

the next slide Jamie less than 40% like if you look across all the lit shirts less than 30 or 40 moderate carb according to Chris next slide Jamie would be 15 to 30 peer-reviewed literature next car next slide 40 to 65 and then high carb Chris calls more than 30% in the peer-reviewed literature high-carb more than 65 and the next slide more than 70 depending on the peer-reviewed literature so you've come up with your own definitions of what is low moderate and high carb yeah just for the purpose

it's just that was for the rest of my work with people that that's not relate I wasn't trying to represent research they're just drunk that's what I consider to be low carb moderate carb and high carb in my work with patients to drown my recommendation or did you not just hear him says he did mean that is what you said I mean you when you wrote this out you did have a different definition than the pure of spirit right side as you do try to do that by his definition have your own

he said no car you heard him say that you heard him say no yes and so slide slide 88 Christian so I just want to sum this up but what's the point here because I wanted first said that everyone should be on a low carb diet no I agree and I've always argued that it depends on everything from your genes to your exercise pattern and Chris where are you getting your numbers from like when you write low carb moderate carbon high carb you make them up this is just a wreck this this is a

pinnacle recommendation from my experience working with patients I'm not representing the scientific literature here I'm not trying to make arguments about but we're talking about their sure that's not the madness that that's absolute Madness to come up with your own definitions and this is why I feel that Chris does getting when you have people like Chris on and multiple times it throws people's perception offers what is a healthy diet because Chris misrepresents the data he comes up with his own definitions of things he misrepresents things that we said in the film okay what did witness representing the football down

well words we're going on the woods here let's just talk about this real quick what so when we're talking about low carb moderate carb or high carb when you're recommending to your patients low carb moderate carb or high carb these definitions how are you coming to these conclusions made them up no based on so there are a lot of people James that disagree with the car the range is kind of intense and yeah that is a scientific consensus how

many different scientists were were polled on this how many different studies were shown I don't know what is the cider this is something like but hold on is this something that you just found that disputes his position or is this like a large group of Knuckles okay so slide 89 also consider verta Health who uses you know over to Folks at verta who are all scientists and bees they used a ketogenic very low carb diet to know the truth about diabetes not actually

hold on let me know Direction you will not be in ketosis at 30% carbohydrate or 25 percent or 20 percent or or even 15 percent you for its low carb said yes probably love great 10% okay great I don't think so you know that and and then you know 40 to 65 percent you're not you're not you're not even in the ballpark you know so if for modern thinking about using low-carbohydrate diets for example

for weight loss or for diabetes or you know metabolic issues like verta health is doing then you low-carb is not going to be 30 to 40 percent okay that's not going to work so that's where my recommend you recommendations based on know based on the optimal range if you have if you look at the rest of the article it's going to be like if you've got diabetes you've got your overweight or obese you're trying to lose weight this is the range that I've found and other

experts like the people at verta Health have found will be most effective and these are the runge's there's no representation that this is the range that is defined as low carb in the scientific literature so your do you time you calling it low car because if someone's on a ketogenic low carb diet in order to get into ketosis you have to have a low number of carbohydrates actually probably even below 10 it's not even that's not even just to be in ketosis like just to get the the maximum weight loss you know someone could be at 15

percent and still get sorry weight loss without being in Quito try bro I got her and dropped because just like in the last five minutes you showed a study from trying to prove your own point but low carb and low fat people had equiv equivalent fat loss you just said that so why aren't you now all of a sudden advocating only low carb diets for bodybuilding only low-carb okay so then I said that they can both work at four different people condiments but James you're misrepresenting what he was saying what do you say

is getting people to go on a healthy diet versus the standard American diet so he's not just talking about below car versus high carb when he's talking about his getting off bullshit like processed foods and sugar and eating I totally agree with you and when you do that people no matter what low carb or high carb lose weight but I think you will agree as well as almost anybody would that getting on a low carbohydrate diet and forcing your body into ketosis makes your body burn fat that's one way that's true but it's it's proven right not

the other piece of this is most of the studies aren't comparing healthy omnivorous diet with you know plant-based vegan diet they're comparing a vegan diet with a standard American diet that contains animal products like what we're talking of not Affair paleo tire stores neutral or Diet yeah which by the way has any of your work or your idea has been published in the scientific literature I've never claimed that they don't I just watch I just wanted so

Wonder no I did one died I couldn't find anything but that's not what we're saying now you're saying that to try to make it seem that he's less of an expert or he is I'm not an expert either so what's the point why are you here why am I here well I actually I did ask if I could bring my chief science adviser who has a double Masters Degree in exercise physiology and nutrition he's a registered dietitian he built with his papers and we can talk about them down totally but I think we should so first of all we just it's we still haven't come to this

understanding of why you think meat is bad for you you were basing it why are they so so there's the individual components like heme iron for example we talked about that last time the heme iron is only associated with poor outcomes in the u.s. it's not that are not true it's not that's not true in other countries it's not true but when you let him and then we can that's not true you can't refute it dropped which looks at most of the studies that have been done on that and then if you also

consider that when you add green vegetables and other plant Foods spices and all of that it reduces the oxidative capacity of heme iron and reduces the absorption of heme iron and you know again we're talking about diet pattern not just is ready are you eating red meat you know in McDonald's and fast food restaurants but if you are you eating it in the context of an overall healthy diet and does it have the same effect right do you know how do you read a fault

this plot

I don't what does that mean that the price you're looking at the statistics The Confident interval to call the forest blast plot plot exactly the kind of looks like a bunch of trees right okay so you don't have to read a forest plot so have you actually looked at the study that you referenced in this study okay so I just read on how to read it so it's kind of

so get a microphone on you James just pull that sucker over sorry you see that first of all he said that what he put up on the screen and if you still got the slide but you said that the he - OCH was only in Americans right but the conclusion of that study said that he my urn was associated with cardiovascular disease that was a conclusion of said she didn't put up on the screen okay and then it's terrible the quote I put up was with respect

my iron intake we found a significant Association only in the studies that were based on American cohorts right so there's two things about that was from the study okay first thing I can't link to my slide I know where it is but basically can you just read the conclusion of that study because I can't find my Slide the conclusions is down here

higher dietary intake of heme iron is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease whereas no association was found between seat cardiovascular disease and non-heme iron intake or total iron intake okay so and then also then I just read the quote just now that that was incorrect by the way the author has made a mistake so you how they make a mistake so if you look at this Forest plot for example this keeps teen grow bush

and you can go and look at the I've looked at the individual studies that they were referencing in the meta-analysis as as my scientific thing so basically you see this this is a 1.86 the composite interval being 1.14 to 3.09 okay that is statistically significant connection between heme iron and you can look at the the conclusions in but you're saying that what he said about eating it with green leafy vegetables were Anonymous we have to point out that it I don't think this one unlike

first of all unlike the dairy one where I think that he was being a bit misleading in this case I don't think he's been misleading I think you I think that you read there was no misleading it was summarizing we already went over this yeah I don't think that's okay you would like to say create that impression but no not there that's just my opinion I think you were being in this case I do not think he was being misleading at all it did say what you said in the study even though you didn't point out the conclusion you left out the conclusion of the study but what

wasn't your fault is I think you I think you read the study but you admitted that you can't you don't know how to read Forest plots and the forest plots if you did look at them in you how to read them you Cho that there were three in the Netherlands and in Sweden that did show a significant correlation because what you were trying to make out with this point which I understand when you're trying to when you have a point of view and you try to work it backwards what you end up doing is you try and find studies that suit your position and so you went and found the study and you found a quote even though you didn't like to put the

none of the study no I did say that there but hold on did acknowledge that there was an association but they would be based on American cohorts yeah but it's not in there but it's not it's not your fault because just the people in the whoever wrote the right up for the study made a mistake there were statistically significant because one point one four two three means that there's like a 14% to 300% increase in that one study of from the Netherlands the Kirsten klippstein grow Bush and for people watching they can go and look at the study look at the conclusions yeah there were three because

his point was what you try to infer from that was that the American diet that includes a bunch of junk food is different than the ones in Sweden and ovens where they are needing so much junk food but that actually was incorrect so he mine has been Associated and is recognized that has been Associated and we still have the studies that eating fruits and vegetables attenuate the oxidative capacity from heme Iron reduce absorption of iron in the gut and now we're focusing on a single mechanism rather than looking at the outcome

right which I again I'm happy to look at the outcomes do you agree with what he just said I do heme iron I think the plant Foods offset the oxidation of set and something some regard the oxidation that you get from animal Foods however if you work out you have oxidative stress okay so if you want to have a meal do you want the plant Foods in the meal to be dealing with the oxidative stress from the animal Foods or do you want the plants to deal with the oxidative stress allow you to recover faster and your next workout will be better I don't think

we know that's true now we do know that we don't have it that's how do we know that's not that's not it this is because we are not focusing on the nutrients in red meat and the things that and the highly bioavailable protein it's not like we're gonna meet is only there to cause is causing oxidative stress I agree it's not the only thing there's some nutrients in me so again the question is is there a place for animal Foods in a diet that is how she overall not not

whether you know you should eat plant Foods right we both agree that you should partying a lot of plant Foods right which is my position I think it would be difficult for me to argue a hundred percent plants versus 50% plants I don't think it's argue to a delay argue like 90 95 % plants versus I think the argument would take hours and hours and hours to convince you why I think a hundred percent plants is but I think there's definitely bio variability and I think different people have different requirements back a second I want to make sure I understood what you just can you

can you repeat that so my position is that the literature I think it's an easier argument because we're talking about plant-based diets and plant-based diets will do either limiting or limiting or eliminating animal products right so for plant-based General diets in general right so a vegan maybe some vegetarian like if you eat turkey on Thanksgiving and then you eat fish once a month I would say that's a plant-based diet you're getting the vast majority of the calories from Plants right and I think there's a lot most people even if your

pasta you're getting the vast majority of your calories from Plants well yeah I mean if we're talking about what's a healthy at the healthiest diet that's the problem right I think whole plant food but a lot of shitty American diet is plant-based you're talking about ones and bread and yeah all the bullshit and peanut butter and jelly sandwiches that's all play a lot of vegans and vegetarians just because you're vegan vegetarian doesn't mean you're healthy exactly right it's like they're my argument because you're getting vast majority of your calories from Whole plant Foods right okay agreed okay you agree well

I don't think the vast majority is my position but I think that's his position right I agree but he's saying yeah I think that I think that look I I eat animal products I have for a long time and I eat a lot of vegetables as well I think that an omnivorous diet is is the key to health that's what I believe yeah I believe that meat helps you recover faster I think it's more nutrient rich I think there's things and meet that it's very difficult to get in plants and I think the quality

of the amino acids and the quality of the protein content and then you Superior to that implant I definitely didn't that work what's the talk about that because it's one of the things you brought up and I kind of just say that I agree with the type of meat that you eat hmm we know that like there's not studies done on the inflammation in elq but there is studies on inflammation in kangaroos for example in Australia so totally wild courts that's like their equivalent of elk right and there is about half the information coming from that as there is from beef well I would imagine I mean you're talking about much

healthier much higher protein cutting the difference between the protein content in Elk per ounce versus the protein content and beef is almost double its a giant and we've just had a controlled trials I showed that showed less inflammation with eating red meat no yeah but the thing is that's It's tricky because when is something healthy or something inflammatory it's always compared to what so in some of these studies what the industry does is they'll compare red meat to bacon or that or you know they'll switch it up is always to watch

work is the other way around they compare a plant-based diet with a standard crop Western diet no I agree that's that's compared to any other studies are you saying meat is bad for you while so he I mean we just started with the human but the heme iron in conjunction with plant-based foods are you also going and he said it's because of the it all is that one of the primary reasons is because of oxidation antioxidants deal with oxidation you get oxidant you get Pro oxidation

from animal Foods you also get product sedation from exercise now there's a no wait we're talking about makanan you know isolated mechanisms right then about about but Chris you talk about mechanisms when you want to and you talk about preclinical data when you want to believe I was talking about them in response to the claims made in the film because I know you acting lessons were mentioned neu5gc tmao heme iron and so I brought those up in you know to respond to them no but that's not when you're using because if you go on your website you mind waiting I'm not saying we

ever talked about mechanisms James I'm saying if you're talking about mechanisms but the outcomes don't support the mechanism then what's the point well I think we can get into epidemiology going to look at that but I think we should definitely hit protein because I think if everyone watching right that's the biggest myth and it's the biggest sort of gripe and then I think we should definitely be 12 so I want to make sure let's go would be 12 because one of the things that you said that he disputed was bring up that B12 quote that you said was complete horseshit I can read it out if you want

don't go ahead please B12 is this and if you disagree with what you were critiquing B12 isn't made I'll bring the whole thing and then so B12 isn't made by animals it's made by bacteria these animals consume in The Soil and Water just like with protein animals are only the middlemen before industrial Farming Farming farm animals and humans could get B12 by eating traces of dirt on plant Foods or by drinking water from rivers or streams but now because pesticides antibiotics and chlorine kill the bacteria that produces vitamin even find animals

be given B12 supplements and you said that's just all false that's all just factually wrong so first of all B12 is made by bacteria but it's animals don't get it from consuming Soil and Water first of all you misrepresented what I said so I said it's made by bacteria that these animals consume you went on to say

that animals didn't get bacteria from the soil that's not what I said I said they'd get it from the bacteria that they got from the soil so you misrepresented what I said you you may doubt that the key claims you met James is that his partner was part used to be possible to get B-12 by eating dirt or on plant foods from drinking water from rivers or streams I've still have not seen convincing evidence that okay that is true slide 49 Jack Norris a vegan dietitian has admitted as much in his

and then even more relevant than all of that is looking at B12 deficiency rates between vegans vegetarians and omnivores in the clinical Literature Like The the other stuff is not really relevant until you get coming to the clinical and Community respects each of your critiques then is that okay yeah so first of all

you said the zero evidence the B12 is fed to cattle right you said that and so can I just first year around because I said even farm animals can you put slide 44 please Jeremy I said even farm animals have to be given B12 supplements that's what I said okay so you decided you mean all farm animals okay so so do you see that that is a screen cap from the film that's a chicken and down at the bottom there's the quote for the poultry right

so would you agree disagree that pigs and chickens and I don't disagree that they sometimes get B12 but dues what about us what about shellfish

shellfish are extremely high in B12 they're the highest even higher than the total non sequitur and it's not actually because the implication in the film was the only reason you get B-12 from eating animal products is because they're given B12 supplements so yeah are you in certainly you really suggesting that the like the population gets most of its B12 from shellfish no okay and I'm saying that the claim that animals need to take B12 supplements in order to have B-12

in their flesh so he's not rhetoric chickens got it from

James where do you think check it out about the shellfish was I never claimed chicken was a great source of I said I said I said in the film even farm animals have to be complete ruslan's you said that it was absolutely false everything that I said about B12 you said was absolutely false as well workers also you talking about the people used to be able to get it from consuming vegetables rather that can be discovered on it and that the water is now because of pesticides and Corinne the water no longer has you

the same percentage of you picked one study that showed equal to rates of deficiency and ignored the huge I know amount of literature that shows big differences between vegans vegetarians and omnivores nitrogen molecule deficient I know all of your critiques because I've noted them and I've got a point for each one so can I just go show them and then you can if you disagree you can so could you just Jamie could you put up slide 45

and I'm in rather than throwing off track going to back humans will get to that in a second but that that I mean B12 is just calmly fed to chickens and you would agree with that right yeah and pigs and lambs and feel that can't room and like ruminants can create B12 in their gut from bacteria that the yeah okay yeah so but you brought entitled bivalves and other yeah no shit like that sucks yeah that's not yeah totally okay so since you brought up cattle you said that cattle there's no evidence of cattle being fed B12

in flight 46

vitamin B12 for sheep and cattle it's what it says you can there's no evidence so you said there's no evidence so on the left that just so because people might not go to read the small print well listen there's people just listening as well sorry sorry for people to the 12 injection for sheep and cattle there's three different products added to feed on the left so it says a liquid complemental complementary feeding stuff contain the essential Trace elements Cobalt selenium for entry 12 of B12 deficient correct it's due to some soil

and it being glowing Cobalt which is a lot of cash okay so now if you just go to slide 47

please marry me next slide okay this is the largest supplier of animal feed or supplements in the world okay on their website young ruminants require supplemental vitamin B12 prior to full room and development they also say vitamin cheap is sometimes administer parenteral E2 incoming feedlot cattle and also be 12 by the way has been shown to increase milk production you said there was no evidence that

a given B 12 and you said that all my statements were absolutely false do you at least admit that you were wrong there

if I said that what kind of collateral specifically that one portion of the statement he said there's no evidence but it's not at all get ever get B12 supplements that I was wrong everybody says okay is the first of all when I made the full statement this is what you first said that's just all false that's all just factually wrong and then later on you said there's also zero evidence that B12 is fed to cattle that is flat out wrong and I have just shown that is that fair I was

okay so we'll get some other points because you were wrong about many other things as well

okay so let's see so you agree that you know it is fed to cattle so you want to look at humans

should I say that on the point that you brought up there been giving minerals and feet and different things to cap the point if cattle or deficient because they're in a feedlot where they're not eating grass not only that and that is the primary reason it isn't only War because swells like become so just don't cause these are young cows that are most likely to have been getting meat B12 from animals do you did

do you dispute that the primary source of B12 for human beings has been eating animals and also fish and shellfish

and history and from Revenge history but but but but evidence that that rivers and streams and dirt has been a primary source going to be I'm also going to give it to you okay you think I came here to that you think I made claims in the film but I couldn't back up perhaps because there are a lot there we went over those in the last show yeah so today we stick with the B12 sure okay so can we just go to sleep

I'd 48

hold on a second please so each of concentration fluctuated between 100 and this is a new levels of water in the English Lake District if you want to go to slide 49

the vegetables were vegetables were eaten without being carefully washed the strict vegetarians who do not practice hand washing or vegetable cleaning maybe untroubled by vitamin B12 deficiency and by the way the there are retained vitamin B12 soil was adequate to prevent B12 so what you're essentially saying is that we're dealing with B12 that was in soil and then in water and that by the chlorination and filtration systems that we use today that's what's ruining the

water in the water does not however be 1290 Morton Raj is a good thing yes but that also takes out the B12 shot so here's that makes your statement correct so he was wrong again that's not the consensus view that you can get enough B12 from eating unwashed but no I'm not that's not what I didn't necessarily say that was the consensus view what he said in the statement was that the reason why we no longer have B-12 in the water and in the soil is because the fact that they had chlorines and pesticides and that seems like there's evidence to back that up again

there is a now people have questioned did I spend a thousand hours the now that I'm giving you the facts do you question that I spent a thousand hours I've spent sent another 2,000 hours looking at peer-reviewed research since then if you say you have I don't have no reason to disbelieve it's a lot of time it's a lot of 10,000 hours is a lot of time like what was it laying Lane Norton said that you should probably have gotten a PhD I think it would well I don't think that's the case thing as people a lot smarter than me that are making these scientific mean the mat that amount of hours of research

you literally my best mated that I've done conserve Decima I've done since then about three thousand hours because once I started making the film doing that then I didn't anyway I believe you so anywhere else so can I 12 analogs in the soil that aren't absorb and utilize like true B12 are great but you're going you don't but I do think the commitment the two things that you think that we've you touched on so far you got wrong absolutely that it's proven that cattle do receive B12 under whatever circumstances I don't know whether it's because they're

grass-fed or grain-fed I'm assuming they're feedlot animals that don't get proper nutrients from soil right don't get proper nutrition mean if you're getting these grain felled fed soybean fed cattle and they're just pouring this dried out shit into a bucket these animals are not grazing and they're likely deficient a lot of different things okay and that's fine there's also they've always been supplementing their diet with minerals supplementing their diet with vitamin that's the funny thing people like oh well let's just take the extreme end of a plant-based diet vegans right so

they all vegans have to take a supplement well guess what you're supplementing anyway you're just doing it in the regular eating that kind of am not 99% of the somewhere down there 97 and 99 yeah whatever so the vast majority so when people are getting it you're supplementing your not just something very be 12 years on amending D in the Years getting it from someone who's supplements it in the feet of the animal and then you get it that was accurate generally not if you're eating grass fed beef not if you're eating shellfish

that's only grass-fed beef again that's wonderful but it can you just admit that you made a mistake about both of those things B12 in cattle and and then you have a third point so we had to be 12 and cattle you had that the users no effort you said it was Zero evidence about that you said there was no evidence about being able to get it from water and and from dirt which again I proved to be for you to be wrong and the third thing that you said I said

there's no evidence that humans primarily got their B12 from eating from Soil and Water with not what you said openings quote

now I didn't

you misread you can he's misrepresenting and he's wrong Joe you got to admit that in this case well it clearly wrong about B12 being given to cattle when we showed three different supplements this is no letter it says before industrial farming farm animals and humans could get B-12 by eating because of dirt on plant Foods or drinking water from rivers or streams for you don't think that people will get the idea from hearing that that we never needed to consume animal products to get B12 and we don't only I could

we could get plenty from eating Corral and so where is the evidence for that other than the one study that you showed their that that's because most evidence vegans even vegan these are modern mining these are modern vegans right that's always talking about something he's going off on a track here because you've got two things wrong safer with you on this because he's got his statement is essentially saying that the reason why we don't get it today is because of requiring office oration walks the side

so your third point you I said this you took issue with my clan okay and up to 39 percent of people tested including meat eaters are low in B12 as a result the best way for humans to get enough B12 whether the animal Foods or not is simply take a supplement then you said he didn't provide a reference for that so it's hard to check but again it contradicts you know mounds of evidence on B12 deficiency so can you bring up slide 50 please Jamie

you said that I didn't provide a reference

okay but in the bottom left where we put all of the references in a variety made a claim about the scientific research well it's covered by the it'll go away in a second okay okay allegedly there yeah okay so first of all there's the reference you claim you don't have a reference would you admit that you were wrong I miss that okay three times wrong about B12 okay so can we just go into your study your tie your e-book on B12 you basically said I don't know where you got that study from your B12 ebook

opened with the exact same study so can you put up slide 51 please Jamie okay is that your e-book on the left yes okay you rounded up to 40 but I kept it at 39 okay realize being specific B12 deficiency is far more common than most Healthcare practitioners in the general public realize data from the Tufts University Framingham Offspring study suggests that 40% of people between the age of 26 and 83 have plasma B12 levels

is in the low normal range a range at which many experienced neurological symptoms that was the opening statement of your B12 ebook and you claimed that wet you couldn't find the evidence of that study no disagreement that B12 deficiency is an issue I've talked about that on my website that's not what that's not what you said on the last time you were on Joe's podcast you said I don't know he didn't provide a reference for that so it's hard to Jack but it contradicts the evidence if that's not

reflective of the preponderance of evidence why did you open your ebook with it

it's not right okay so there's two different issues here one is do omnivores get B12 deficiency I do yes they do okay and for the people tested in this study which is what are you reference that's right and there are many I'm not saying this study is bad but you said something else look at all of you said that I didn't provide a reference but you did you do you write your on ebooks by the way I do and you don't remember that study no I write a lot do you know how do you have any idea how many articles I've written over the years all right dude

you remember every study from every article I don't know I'm sorry right so I think I was on a train and that's the thing do you not feel like I'm a combative trainer you yourself recognize that you're not a nutrition expert right you said that at the beginning I'm not a nutritionist I have Masters Level Training in nutrition so yeah so there's two you've got a number 12 is to specifically me like Masters Level Training and nutrition thank you Joe well in

California acupuncturist have four year master's program which includes a lot of medical sciences and nutrition research methodology etcetera because we're considered primary care providers in the state of California so the training is a lot different than it is in other places so there's the question of can omnivores develop B12 deficiency yes they can if you go and run it and look at the rest of the e-book it's because of things like sibo

test higher ranges you'll actually accept higher ranges of what would be considered potentially deficient right you'll say like three four hundred might be deficient so that would mean that even more people were deficient right now I'm not arguing that vegans can be more Division and omnivores but can I just go to slide 52 can I gotta slide 52 so what is that what is the question here if you're not arguing no I'm just well there's not much sense he's not be more is more common in

Major Terry I'm pointing out that you guys that is what clinically makes the difference if someone is B12 deficient I'll get then then they develop think I'm not prepared to get to that I will get to that you said like the four or five claims that I made about B12 or patently false I've already pointed out three of the things that you got wrong out of the five and you are the one that like is recommending telling people what to eat I am a combative trainer and my facts in this case

this doesn't change anything about the fact that I'm recommending no it don't forget is the recommendation is still that people get enough B12 and they are less likely to do that on a vegetarian and vegan diet and there's lots of studies showing that John Deere almond or can an omnivore develop B12 deficiency absolutely I see it in my practice I'm nearly all of the people that not the vast majority no no I didn't say that the vast majority of that 40% were meat eaters you referenced

in reference to study because they're more meat eaters in the general population that has nothing to do with the fact that beat the mediators are getting about not 12 to fish I'm not arguing with that we've got all of these studies about homocysteine nine out of ten reviews that have shown higher homocysteine levels and vegans and vegetarians that's the point that he made last time I was on never get the okay but okay so when you reference the Framingham study you didn't link to the study you link to an article from the USDA about study and that study said aw

Ali the researchers found no it and getting this is the opening statement of your Eve book references this study but you felt you didn't mention this part oddly the researchers found no association between plasma B12 levels and meat poultry and fish intake even though those food supply the bulk of B12 in the diet it's not because people aren't eating enough meat to get the B12 Tucker said it's the vitamin isn't getting absorbed so

is that so this backs up my claim that the safest way to get B12 is to take a supplement now Crystal just say 60. Can I just finish on this point no no you can rebut imagine right so your claim was while people can just go and get so you agree that sir no I would say that vegans that don't supplement and on the walls there's a lot more deficiency in vegans right like it's a consistent nutrient of concern that we can should be cautious or by really pretty much universally accepted right yeah so but that you were even if you don't accept the 40% number even though that you said

I didn't say I didn't accept that everybody doesn't it doesn't matter whether you accept it or not it's like you've even said that like we should consider higher levels betrayal division So It remake even more but doesn't that doesn't really matter the point is that you are saying that well they're going this thing they're saying the vitamins not getting absorbed in that B12 also my point my point was it's safer to just take a B12 supplement and for the general population in the world that is the best recommendation you'll say you can go to your

doctors and get a $60 blood test and test would be 12 and then you can decide whether you need a supplement or not yeah mashed up you guys both here why isn't it getting absorbed if there is a higher level of vitamin B12 and fish and there's other factors that inhibit the absorption so what are these Evo's one yeah when likely gospels conditions but also in terms of our growth in the small intestine so so Joe so basically we still have that we notice about the data here let's go back to the argument about because I said the best safest way for everyone to get B12 is to take a supplement where

you say where you can just spend $60 and get a blood test it but you've got to recognize that in the world not everybody can afford ethics the only okay so the safest way to get B-12 if whether you eat me or not is to get take a B12 supplement we know the other one surest way let's just all agree on that the surest way and if you surest way for sure but then when you've got studies that show you know 11% of omnivores have B-12 depletion versus 77% of vegetarians and 92% of vegans

you know that's with using Holo trans cobalamin which is a much more sensitive marker B12 deficiency than serum B12 which is really problematic and then you have nine out of ten comparisons of Home assisting that found higher levels of homocysteine and vegetarians and omnivores and higher levels and vegans compared to vegetarians and homocysteine is also more sensitive marker than serum B12 so there's four stages of B12 deficiency and serum B12 will only go down out

range in the fourth and final stage of B12 deficiency so these other studies that I shared on the last show we are looking at Holo trans cobalamin which was the most sensitive marker B12 depletion it's not technically deficiency at that point and then you have homocysteine and methylmalonic acid that are more Cent less sensitive than Holo trans cobalamin but more sensitive than serum B12 okay okay can you bring up slide 54 please

okay and I need to show you so not only if you got all the facts wrong so far about B12 of my claims you said that they were all false and they weren't false right every claim that I made so far was backed up by science and you have admitted that you made mistakes okay so this actually slide this is your slide right this is because this is how I can show that he's handpicking these studies to make his claim you said that 90% of vegans were deficient in let's read what it says is B12 depletion among our animal omnivores vegetarians and vegans

and vegans night we got to remember that most people are probably listening versus walk sorry yeah okay so vegans 92% it says 77 vegetarians 77% and omnivores 11% for B12 depletion but that study showed it was more like 40% of depletion emails about across the board I'm not trying to compare the two okay I'm just trying to say Your Case by using the study is that 90% of vegans are deficient in B12 and omnivores are not efficient okay today

defeated whatever I'm not going to try okay whatever the number trying to take it I'm not trying to pick apart this study I agree with this study okay can you just go to the next slide please Chris I think it's slide 55

but this is from the study okay this is from 16 years ago by the way and a very small study from 16 years ago and this is why I show you that he's hand picking the data that he uses and this is where I go back to the fact that it's about the interpretation of the totality of evidence and you can't really rely on some of this not a nutrition expert handpicking studies to suit their bias so in sub this is what it said in subjects who did not consume vitamins the levels were Walker said right 11% in omnivore 70%

so I would agree like if you couldn't get B-12 anywhere you should incorporate some animal Foods into your diet fat okay but let's look at some other studies so slide 56 and I don't I'm not only choosing a few I'm shutting up certainly there in my favor I'm not saying that vegans don't have lower B12 levels because some people don't supplement right butts at you I'm showing you hand-picked a study from 16 years ago slide 56

from this is for a new study from 2018 with twice the sample size of one's and you know people now know usually to B12 supplement the studied markers indicate a generally sufficient cobalamin status independently of the diet preferences lacto-ovo vegetarian or vegan slide 57

now this is a study that looked at runners in May of 2019 really current

and it feels like you might not have the most current data because you said to me in your email that you did nutrition is only one part of what you do and you have lots of other things that you're doing right so slide 57 this is comparing vegans vegetarians and omnivores and these are Runners yeah and recreational run recreational yeah all three group showed an adequate biomarker status of B12 related parameters and then flied 58 it would be

and this one only backs up my point about vegans but also and plant based leaders but also that supplement is a better so the vitamin B12 status of supplement users are vegans and omnivores was higher compared to the non supplement users and a higher proportion of non-stop news has had B12 parameters outside the reference range you know the reuleaux so again that's more evidence that people it's a good idea to supplement in general because you just have higher levels and after and consent

conditions often you get over 50 you have lower incomes it's a water-soluble vitamin anyway rapid after 50 you lose intrinsic factor so you can't absorb as much a right direction that it's not dangerous to have higher level so you know know you could like yeah exactly a good thing to supplement period right direction so every single thing that I said in the B12 tankmen is true and backed up by So Jamie and bring up slide 59 for me for looking at totality of evidence let's look at more

or evidence totally but again I'm not pointing those who studies out say there's not more I'm saying that you hand-picked the study where vegan so I don't have to pick a study James there's many studies here now you're talking whether we're not taking vitamins and I agree so we agree that people on plant-based diets Geographic vitamin vitamin B12 I see Lisa and we agree that most people are getting their B12 supplement in any way just indirectly through animals fair enough fair enough if you followed

the diet that these animals were on where there which is the most attractive people and again I would say like look if you want to eat 95% plants and you can know how common it is for them to supplement animal diet with B12 is it a rare thing going to start medication with Catalyst flower because it's a lot of a lot but magical Aura around quite a bit slower but it's not super rare because a lot of soil is deficient in Cobalt and cows need to consume the Cobalt to manufacture the B12 in their in their room so it's more of a side

effect of mineral and nutrient deficient also aluminum not for pigs and chickens and that was up so you can have higher homocysteine levels and omnivores not attend comparisons found higher homocysteine levels in vegetarians and omnivores and higher levels in vegans and vegetarians Ryan and the prevalence of hyper homocysteine home assist anemia among vegetarians may actually be higher than that among non vegetarians already diagnosed with heart disease so that's 9 of 10

comparisons that's not hand picking one study that's nine out of ten comparisons that have been done on this topic right and out like you said before we shouldn't just look at the Mark as we should look at the outcomes right

and the outcomes is their feet is my favorite eye on the vegans and vegetarians with higher homocysteine levels do not have increased risk of cardiovascular disease or diabetes or death from those or from cancer I didn't make the claim that they do from that person that's Daddy I'm so we're talking about B12 and homocysteine being a marker of Brian I am Chris I am showing that you picked the study from 2016 which have a very small sample size that was nine out of ten comparisons right there that was not the only study that I

no sounded you understand why I am saying that when you came to be 12 all of the statements that I made in the film were true and you said that they were patently false and you were wrong

I didn't Joe come on I'm like now listen I've come in here I've said it already yeah no I just want to make sure correct right because I've come in here and people think oh what are you going to say to that debunk Chris did not debunk the film he made misrepresentations of our claims and he got things factually wrong well he certainly seems to have gotten it factually wrong that animals particularly cows are not given B12 supplements he certainly seems to have gotten it factually wrong that at least some of the B12 that people would be able to get in

past but you got from water and soil and at 40 cents before division with valve and the best way to get B12 is the supplement so he got everything still yes but you're wrong so so the thing is I have proven that he got three or four things factually wrong I'll ever eat well right and I am a combatives instructor okay I've heard that right I'm sorry but I'm just saying I'm putting myself down I understand I'm not like a super intelligent Guy where you are

you are very intelligent I've said that before and what you did is you did research on these very important subjects when you acquired a lot of data so I think this is what people do when they go to school I mean it's like the difference between someone who's educated and not educated is not whether or not they go to a specific place in total it's whether or not they absorb the information and when they study and you know I'm but you said you studied a thousand hours before the film and 3,000 sense that you're obviously educated you understand what you're talking about so so anyway you got things factually wrong about to be 12 so

to the people listening or watching do you really want to put the interpretation of the data in the hands of someone that just got so many things wrong about B12 well he got things wrong about your assertions about be I made me for sure claims that still stand that vegetarians and vegans have much higher rates of B12 depletion or deficiency than omnivores the bulk of the sudden special implementing the Do Not ship until they don't care if they don't several degrees but like there's no disagreement

weddings are vegetarians and anyone over 50 and moat like the safest were in your now disputing the safest way to get B12 is to take a supplement is the best way to get is surest way to get B12 but it's not necessary for many people write for people that can afford blood tests which is not most of the world like you will it was sitting in America in a nice light air conditioned room and we know we've got cars and we drove here we can afford to go to the doctor like the best way to get B12 is to take a supplement period and you're wrong if you think otherwise

if you can afford your sure if you can afford it if you but you're gonna get but if you have documents to everybody around the world that's expensive right here's the thing if you have a diet that gives you the ample amount of B12 and you don't need his help venture out need to stop of my sure you're saying is that blood tests are expensive so you should take an expensive supplement now they're not expensive V12 not it's like if you buy in bulk like two dollars a year but now I'm not saying there yeah you bite and hours a year for one fucking mind

if you if you were saying you probably want to really yeah you've got it but the fact the trick is you gotta like you'd have to split it with a bunch of people because it's like years worth of Supply but anyways it's correct so so know the argument is that Frank Ocean and I've also shown it to the world I've also two bucks a year I've heard your hook a lot of people up I've also shown that in the study that you presented in your ETA ebook stated that like they weren't absorbing it as well from Enterprise I'm not saying there's not be to have an animal parks and also we have to remember

were one last thing that the B12 that people are getting an animal products it was supplemented in the first place in sauna in that appears in the vast majority of violent fish not in grass-fed not enough she'll not as much in the finance boss majority of animal products that people are reading B12 supplement and so I'm just saying the safest way to get B12 is take a supplement in the vast majority side true yeah you think the vast majority of people are eating wild caught fish and I don't know how many animals are actually getting those supplements friends

the chicken all chickens all of the chickens that's chicken is only begins are omnivores they're not fed omnivorous diets run most part unless they're free range chickens if you give it to you ever seen a chicken fuck up a mouse it's pretty stunning yeah yeah they're carnivorous little monsters then chickens in when you get them and you get those eggs and the eggs are like a really dull yellow those are animals that are eating grain only those are vegetarian chickens that's not what they want to eat what they want to eat is worms but not living in the network

is that right in their natural state they will happily don't need to have supplementation this is sort of an argument against vegetarian diets for chickens really because it's not chickens aren't really supposed to eat that way yeah and feedlot for beef for me laughing be exact but they're not supposed to eat grain either the protein because I think she'll miss protein every flight time now we're not gonna mess we have plenty of time cool 12 you made some excellent points and you definitely cleared up what was what was misrepresented

and it's really why I really appreciate you having me on because you guys did like a three-hour debunk right and there was just a lot of things with factually wrong and there's more that I can point out okay let's get I really really appreciate having me I appreciate you being and I really appreciate Chris and as long as much as we disagree I really appreciate you coming on and giving me the opportunity and you bring a so let's talk about how do I know I'm getting like emotional and sometimes but I'm annoyed by people who made a move and I get it I get it cool so

so you wanna talk about protein and yes what issues are they still so that's also just the red meat and dairy thing outstanding 200 whether or not red means bad for you yeah we never really cleared that up but why do you down to read knees back and go with protein but let's finish that okay because we really should finish that we can always jump protein because I'm sure proteins can be a long discussion well I know I think it's going to happen here so we can talk about red meat I've taught shown that like some of the individual things like heme iron for example shown to

problem flama Tori and by the way just to back you up let me see what a slob pro-inflammatory necessarily correlated with poor health because sometimes things that provide information on passion nobody has a positive reaction climatic Homedics dresser yeah so the things like exercise your exercise you create yeah hold me sis right sure sauna yeah and it's the same thing right he'll sort of try and show that fish

you know he'll the tmao for example you'll say well how can TM yo be bad will give you that will give us that but let's stick the red meat why do you think red meats bad for today I was one of the things okay then read me just like he mind that I just showed is inflammatory but he - associated with cardiovascular risks and he - found in me

and eating plants in a healthy diet pattern it offsets it absolutely yeah is there evidence that eating meat by itself is associated with cardiovascular disease nobody ever has eaten meat by itself what about the internal organs people there's no resource guys are berries in the coal miner okay there's no research on that so Bond wanna that's one of my people just eating all meat diet yeah there's not yeah I mean if we both agree like let's just put a create a false dichotomy

to me Chris if you're if there was a like all animal products fight not just kind of over eggs and all this stuff and then there was a fully plant-based diet supplement with B12

which one would you Advocate if false dichotomy I'd probably check pick the plant diet probably although I would be concerned about nutrient deficiencies yeah I've never advocated for a carton the carnivore diet I said as much okay last show but that says something about plants right

plants are awesome right so we agree on that he's never had anything wrong with all he's ever said was that eliminating all animal products from your diet is probably not healthy unless you follow a very strict routine when you make sure that you have all your bases covered nutritionally that's what Chris has said from the jump so now I would extend that and just say that I don't think there's strong evidence suggesting that including some animal products in your Whole Foods plant based

diet is harmful and can I can I just wear well that's where we seem to have a sister and I even said that their brains of that can vary tremendously could be 5% for someone who's just eating mostly plant-based diet they're eating some shellfish and organ Meats for the nutrient density or you could have someone who eats more animal products and depends on the person and what their needs are I got with that first off in the second half but just to back up what Joe does slide 62

because I mentioned this earlier but we didn't put a slide on but I think the graphic again enormous we're listening so if maybe Joe you describe it to people differences in postprandial inflammatory responses to a modern versus traditional meat meal so this is Spectrum analysis that kangaroo this is kangaroo meat versus beef wagyu beef is I pronounce it thank you okay so you'd recognize that marks in CRP tnf-alpha and il-6 are inflammatory markers yeah okay good so I just want to point out that like yeah if

eat 90% plants and you can eat the rest of it from animal products I think that wild-caught elk and kangaroo meat stuff like that would be the way to go by far

well I just make sense just to show you like there's look at the the that there's about half the information roughly coming from the wild core well that makes sense because what most of the time we're dealing with when you're dealing with beef you're dealing with this grain-fed unhealthy animal when you talk about why you beef that is that's a dying animal I mean if you saw a person whose muscle tissue looked like a Wagyu steak goodbye bro you gotta get on a fucking diet you know

I mean really but if you saw like you know an athlete if you looked at an athlete's muscle tissue would look like a piece of elk most likely look very lean and healthy and dense so anyway I just wanted to point out that one that shows a couple of things that shows that meat does create inflammation I would like to see this on grass fed meat so close to this feed lot but by even if it matched the

you know the kangaroo me we're still seeing information there mmm and yeah and certainly like he said I agree if you're going to eat animal Foods I think it's wise timing wise to eat a lot of plant foods with that those animal Foods

right well I definitely think you're going to eat animal foods you should eat a lot of plants where there's also a lot of benefits to it in terms of fiber in terms of your Mo the bio microbiota yeah there's there's a lot of benefits to having these fermented vegetables as well you know things like kimchi and having things that provide you with good probiotics the all these things there's great benefit to a lot of plant foods and people on plant-based diets just end up

and naturally getting more fiber for most people are deficient in fiber and if you look at like the Paleolithic period you be looking at like maybe a hundred grams of fiber angry and very high fiber intake and B and plan B one promised I'd get more fiber than people and another diets as long as you're eating healthy as we both agree oh yeah so it's pasta and pizza never shit but just to be feather even in vegans and vegetarians and all of the studies

they're still getting more fiber despite the fact that I you and I would agree they're not eating the healthiest diet overall overall vegan overall completely plant-based people are the only people that have four within the recommended BMI range than the people that the most fiber BMI range body mass index is always talking about yeah yeah but body mass and that's not a great not a great measure is a shitty one right that makes it not beasts right yeah there's a lot of nonsense to agree I agree generally that if if you look at people who are on

vegetarian or vegan diet compared with people on the standard American diet and they're gonna have right I'm people on the Earth right but that's also why you take someone who's eating healthy plates of broccoli and kale and also has a piece of grass fed meat that's what I want to talk Tony I want to talk about people that's why I want your conscious diet no I totally agree I have course you're going to see Marcus like for example the longest study on a Paleo diet right had a two-year follow-up and they had improved it lost body fat

and improved blood markers what was really interesting is how they were told to eliminate Dairy right so you cut out Dairy they were told to reduce the amount of or cut out completely process plant foods like white flour and sugar and all this type of stuff they were told it increased their fruits and vegetables and they were told to increase their meat consumption and they got you know improve health markers all across the board well now what was interesting is that the end of the two years what they found was that people had not stuck with the meat recommendations

the captain meet recommendation is the same they got out processed junk food right and trans fats and stuff that you'd all agree we should get out of our diet right they took out milk out of their diet and they increase the amount of plant Foods so it's very clear that the benefit did not come from increasingly consumption it came from increased plant food consumption or eliminated and I think the benefit is decreasing bullshit right now is a two-fold thing right you cut out things that are inflammatory

ettore and you put in things that are anti-inflammatory you cut out things that are low in antioxidants you incorporate things that are high in antioxidants so that was the major benefit it wasn't from this from increased meat consumption

who's saying it is from increased meat consumption I mean I'm just saying that was the benefit of a paleo diet is going in a more Whole Food plant right but I think that's what everyone says the idea is that you eliminate processed foods your eliminate sugar eliminated rate these things that are just filled what we know that it's not just it's a two-fold difference when you incorporate whole plant Foods there's the opportunity cost so you'll replace your you're getting rid of crab and in my personal opinion and based on the consensus

you're replacing both highly processed foods and animal foods and you're incorporating more whole plant foods and that is the scientific consensus is he a predominantly plant-based diet you can see the same thing about the benefits you see with vegetarian and vegan studies comparing with standard my I agree I agree you removing a lot of the crap a great but we're both Studies have you got comparing a new trevore diet to you know a whole food plant-based diet we don't have them so we have to infer and when we infer that we have to rely on Experts

that are experts in their field right we don't we don't turn to Chris and go okay can you tell us more about nutrition and topology and Urology then all of these experts I think that's I agree we shouldn't just listen to me but I don't think it's genuine just to suggest that there's a consensus that a whole food plant-based diet is a better choice than a plant-based diet that also contains some animal products that we have

studies on that and we probably won't unfortunately for in the near future because right especially those are some outcomes because you're called to a fun 40 years yeah they're not good so we are I agree that it's hot like again I've said before that we should be getting the vast majority of our calories from Whole plant Foods I think there's enough in the literature to show and and the Academy of nutrition and dietetics recognizes that completely vegan diet a health of all life stages including for athletes I think that there's sufficient evidence to a hundred percent but I'm not telling people that they should be doing that I'm saying you can

eat whatever they want but I think we both agree that people should be getting out junk food right soda and trans fats on by the way on trans fats

so they ask you in the beginning of the show what what your position was because that's the fundamental question for me is that is this question that we're talking about right now right which is is there sufficient evidence to suggest that you know everybody most people whatever you want to say should be on a hundred percent or even 95% plant-based diet versus a plant-based diet that contains some animal products and my argument all along has been

there's not sufficient evidence right but you also think that you also think that completely plant-based diet is likely to be nutrient deficient and all these other things and you know I don't do you know his history do you know I know and I think that's a vegan yeah that's why I think that there's I think there's emotional ties I think you've my history is not relevant you know I think an equals 1 in terms of what happened yourself you said that I had like the worst mood and but also said so you eat their people acknowledge that there are many successful run against

and vegan athletes like you would your own version of even vote the end of one and also you didn't follow the scientific consensus about plant-based diets when you did it so you chose a macrobiotic diet and you chose a raw vegan diet just the widget is two iterations right why did you choose those when they weren't based on scientific consensus because there wasn't this was 20 years ago and I wasn't paying attention to it again level Jamie traveled around the world and you got sick and you were attributed it to the diet which may or may not have I didn't attribute it to the diet

that's what I don't even know why we're talking my experience because it is relevant because it shows that like I don't know why you were vegan or vegetarian maybe it was for like animal rights reasons maybe you felt bad for going back to eating meat so now you need to field prove like the reason that you need to know the reason you need to do you think the film is because you've got a massive business selling supplements and protein powders and giving diet advice so a film that there's I make very very little money selling supplements James I'm just a massive business its base

Ali convenience for my patients that's I'm just I'm just saying overwrite my business is basically training people right but being a clinician there's no I have I don't profit from you know selling and like Animal product you did you doing directly because you advise this diet so the film is very bad for you personally because if people believed the film which you know like the defense health agency they review the film they don't care about like this myth that we should eat

exactly the same way as our ancestors not the reason he really ate that way but they don't care about them if they care that what is going to be better for Warfighter Effectiveness and to cut the health care costs of our military so they looked at the science independently you think they like the defense health agency is full of vegans I mean so you have a film is neither here nor there for me but that's what we're here for that's what you do it is you said that the fair reason that I'm here is because and the reason that I came when Joe invited me and I appreciate it

probably tell you that I it took a few invitations to get me here it is just to provide the other side of the view here it's not because it materially affects me in any way believe me I've got lots of other things as I told you in the email she didn't even like my nutrition team they spent full time either Consulting Elite athletes or military personnel or they dig into the research like a chief science advisor 8 hours a day

all he does is dig into the latest research so what you can't you come on to Joe's podcast and you're supposed to like people are supposed to believe that you are the best person to because you say it's about the meta-analyses and he says about the totality of evidence we agree but you're suggesting is that people should listen to your interpretation of the evidence when you get things factually wrong people should make up their own mind you don't even you don't even know that we have provided and you don't even know how to read a basic Forest plot in our point because you're not certified

not like I okay I'm again I'm not a specialist in nutrition like I would have liked to have bring like to have brought David a chief science adviser who knows hundred times more about nutrition than either and you're coming on here telling people what to eat you said yourself you're not an expert in nutrition and you don't know how to read the nutritional data let's talk about some of the claims okay that's not part of the protein let's talk about protein know we talk about the film let's talk about the protein so is that fair there was your gelatin right okay

so can I just just so I understand your position and I'm sorry for getting worked up like that don't ever like I'm in like an attorney trying to interrogate you but I feel like I spent a lot of time digging into research I had the research checked and checked and checked again I hadn't research check to make sure that it was not cherry-picking that it was reflective of the preponderance of evidence but who was checking it where they people who were not Advocates of a whole food plant-based diet exclusively or were they not ball like because all of the experts in the film are people who are

really aligned with this that preserve I interview them because they're aligned with the consensus and know and I over half of the people in the family I thought you just agreed that there is not a consensus that a hundred percent plant-based diet is better than a diet that includes a lot of plans for awesome animal products yeah so so where were the experts that would represent that point of view

this doesn't have to be a hundred percent plant-based diet I agree it doesn't have to be a hundred percent the film's had plant-based diets we now I'll tell you why we only interviewed vegans for the athletes right the funds to actually spoke on screen in Arnold is not vegan he doesn't drink Dairy things is for babies and he's cut down on meat by 80% but all the people I mean you know Nene is not a hundred percent vegan he's on a largely plant-based diet he's a bit of seafood and build stuff like that but all the people interviews yeah X as well so

the reason that we only put and by the way we did interview Loren cordain and Rob wolf and I can get to that as well if you want because the and reported Anthropologist laughed in their faces when they're not claim that they you know where I'm talking about scientists who published these you know who are on the team's the papers that I've shared ya like it like new to Rex who are funded by the industry and we can get no not neutral that's disingenuous to claim that all of the research that I've shared not answer is fun is industry forget if you want it we can acknowledge claim that

like the recent study that just came out and we're getting off track the recent study that just came out that said that red meat and processed meat is totally fine right like you really want to go with that to me it feels like you don't have your finger on the pulse honestly I'm not trying to be rude I think you probably know a lot about you think about that study well the new direct study the study that said that red meat the signature xid okay so in the annals of internal medicine the day before the film came out

Six studies exonerating red meat and processed meat all from the same company but apparently giving recommendations will guess what exponent a neutral Rex and companies like that are not the ones that give public recommendations on what people should be doing number one okay and we talked about this in the film with exponent nutria Rex is like another exponent so if you look at their recommendations first of all Frank who's Frank who's now the chair of Nugent Harvard he took what will its place said the panel's back around oceans that adults

continue to that red meat consumption habits is highly irresponsible Walter Willett said it's the most egregious abuse of data he's ever seen and if you want to follow their recommendations if you could put up some slide 92 so they did the same thing in 2017 for the sugar industry so there was a meta-analysis in the annals of meat a day you mean the neutral thing comes out so it was so badly Johnson is the director and co-founder of nutria rats and the first author of

the people that were talking about for red meat okay that just exonerated red meat apparently and process misses the same company says that this at present there seems to be no reliable evidence indicating that any of the recommended daily caloric thresholds for sugar intake are strongly associated with negative health effects so very good and meta-analysis saying that don't worry about your intake of sugar at all that was what their meta-analysis inclusion it came to and then two years later the day before the Kim's can't film came out and do you really think that

a coincident do you think that the let me tell you something okay the of our email subscribers do you know the email address of the person that opens and Views are emails the most from the beef checkoff program and they've been doing that since we started so the sign up for our mailing list they look at when the film is coming out and you don't you think it's a coincidence that the day before asked film comes out they release a paper exonerating red meat and cancer

and the same state so if you're going to buy into the nutria rat study about red meat and cancer then to be fair you've also got to buy into their conclusions about sugar because they were paying out tell you who they were paid by okay so to financial support for that paper was funded by the technical is cut this now listen to this sounds great the technical committee on dietary carbohydrates of ILS I North America and is I as the international Life Sciences Institute sounds pretty legit right so its members include Coke

Cola Hershey Company Pepsi company and Red Bull and a bunch of others folks looking out for your best interest that should go okay sir okay will be a problem if that was the only so do you just you just you claimed all this recent study and I honestly again no disrespect your busy with lots of other things you run a successful business Consulting people selling stuff I get you don't have the time you weren't able to read a basic Forest plot to look at statistical significance and confidence intervals okay I just don't think that the you're the one

how to interpret the data so the reason you don't have a you haven't seen the hundreds of really respected scientists that have come out saying that this nutria rat study and by the way there's an investigation into the annals of internal medicine because of this for accepting this stuff from neuter X but if you're going to accept the meta-analysis on red meat and on processed meat for cancer then you've also got to accept the 2017 studies meta-analysis if you accept the source if you accept the source of the same that is the same nutrient it

me the only meta analysis that showed no association between red meat and and heart disease or cancer that would be a problem at the one time first I'm talking about the one that you cited you made out this is like okay so second of all I pointed out the funding industry funded research is four to eight times more likely right yeah three to do and going back to that Dairy one by the way do you know that when they did their meta-analysis they doubled and tripled and quadrupled up

cuz when they looked when the meta-analysis that analyze the meta-analyses the multipliers included the studies multiple times you don't say yeah because they took it into account each time and so when industry floods the scientific research with their funded studies again if they find us that he doesn't turn out readying other studies in Kenosha same conclusion adding those on as if it's an additional studies that we're saying no it's so look if you industry-funded studies and and only did you decide if you're on

beef industry our dairy industry are you going to put out the studies that aren't in your favor no right and you also don't have to you spin it until what you do is right if you want to make beef look better if you want to accelerate the fat look okay or if you want to make cholesterol okay you can you can switch things around the city to make it look good if you want to like look at eggs and for example and I don't want to get like it continues with three a debate about cholesterol and saturated fat but if you if you give if you go from 10 eggs a week to 12 eggs a week it doesn't raise your serum cholesterol so that's how they did the study but

if you go from no eggs a week to 100 we get does increase because there's something called the cholesterol Plateau so what the industry does is it tricks you it does

but then when you look at eggs and outcomes like cardiovascular disease you don't see what you're doing but we're getting off track I was just making a point that industry-funded studies sway the results of the meta-analysis right I think that's I think that's fair and it's done with the sugar industry and it's done with it was done with tobacco and again I'm not comparing the the amount of increased risk of cancer from diet that was never claimed that was made it was the Playbook that is used by the drug industry by the meat industry by the sugar you know by the sugar industry by the dairy industry so

even though your film came out of these studies came out right before you film its kind of proving your point that this same company that tried to exonerate the sugar industry is also you're going to accept that you're going to cite that as evidence and they're going to excite that good the fact the reason I think because like you said you're so busy on many other things is I just don't think that your fingers on that was not the only study that I know I know it's not I know it's no stairs but like any other meta-analyses 2010 15 we can look at them you know if bullets do that

okay but can I just say yeah let's look at those studies so but again the funded you know they're including studies that are funded by industry and so unless you can pass those out and say is that really a shame we can't rely on any study no I don't either that's a strong though I said that I said that that you would really need to look at the way in which a study is designed to see if it was viable and you also have to replicate the studies you know like Studies have to be replicated and so what I'm saying is so there

I'm like I just finished the last point now again to show as many studies as you want because again you can show as many steps as you want you can't prove you're not hand picking them to suit your bias you are the one that quoted this study it shows that your fingers that on the pulse because hundreds of like top scientists have written letters or joined in the same letter to the owls Internal Medicine asking for those studies to be retracted and there's now an investigation into the annals of internal medicine yet you are silent message

Ian doesn't prove nothing has been doesn't prove I was aware of that controversy and when you cut your common read Forest plot it's not it's not a controversy is not surprising if red meat has been demonized for as long as it has been and then a study comes out which exonerates it it would be entirely expected that there would be controversy so and do you know who the that study was funded by but can you just put up slide in 93

just as just to show that

anyway so just it's not just me saying this I mean the

you know scientists do to try to meet guidelines didn't report past food and she died so that so not only because remember most people are listening scientists who discredited meet guidelines didn't report past food industry ties the lead researcher Bradley see Johnston said he was not required to report his past relationship with a powerful industry trade group on know what that tree group is but if you scroll down well I can't exactly Jim there's oh it's like I didn't tell you in the first one the sugar one it was that Pepsi and all this stuff although they make it fit they

make a non-profit with a fancy sounding name right and then they back it all this industry funding same with the the meat study that that's why I don't understand why he'd use it if you were being objective are you saying all these are the other studies but why name this one as though it's got validity because so for do you feel like they cut the concocted this study and released it right before your film specifically I think it's likely that it was tied into the ground but it doesn't matter whether it is I'm showing that to to

to present that study as evidence when the consensus of the scientific researchers is against that study that is calling for an investigation that has asked for it to be retracted the co-author of the paper who's part of the leadership team at new tareq's he's the Vance Chancellor of Dean and Agriculture and Life Sciences at Texas A&M right Texas A&M is partnered with the beef checkoff program

all right kind of Pop neighbors and this is also discussed in the New York Times slide 94 and there's actually there's a it goes a lot deeper than that actually goes back to Brazilian government but letting slide 94 by aside funding for is just causing about research group that discounted risks of red meat has ties to program partly back by beef industry so anyways so this doesn't necessarily mean what they're saying is incorrect and this is where it gets slippery right because if they found things that happen to be

and they release it but they release it from a shitty company that has said things to show should have chose the hand-picked which studies included on dialysis who because you've had plenty of time to explain this yeah to get to your point Chris you agree with the founding with the the conclusion of that study and you think that the evidence points that there's many studies that point to the idea that red meat is not in fact the culprit and the culprit is when you're looking at

these epidemiology studies that you're looking at the overall diet of these people and ask them do they eat me you're not asking what is the quality of the food they eat yeah so I agree that conflicts of interests are problem and I and you know that the editorial that was published in annals alongside of this study said this is sure to be controversial but it's based on the most comprehensive review of The Evidence to date because that review is inclusive those who seek to dispute it will be hard

us to find appropriate evidence so and who wrote that bit doesn't matter now she's had studies covering millions of participants over 34 years there are several other men has analyses that have been done over the past few years so I don't know the best way to show these because I've got them in a Google doc

so 2017 let's see if I can give you the title Jamie maybe you can Google it or something contemporary review of the relationship between red meat consumption and cardiovascular risk quote from that study the review concluded quote recent findings demonstrated that despite the presence of heme iron and carnitine red meat does not significantly increase

risk when it is assumed in recommended doses you have 2014 meta-analysis of 13 studies there it is again these are this one Jamie is

called association between

total processed red and white meat consumption all cause cardiovascular disease heart disease mortality and this is a good example of what you were just saying Joe there was a slight increase association between red meat consumption and cardiovascular mortality

and then at the end no significant associations is observed between any type of meat and heart disease mortality results of the present meta-analysis indicate that processed meat consumption could increase mortality these results should be interpreted with caution do the high heterogeneity observed in most of the analyses as well as the possibility of residual confounding meaning healthy user bias lippe

in a meta-analysis of 11 studies of red meat consumption and heart disease concluded the quote the current literature data does not support the existence of a clear relationship between a large intake of red meat and increase risk of myocardial ischemia and then this is one of the largest that was done let me give you the title of this Jamie red and processed meat consumption and risk of incident coronary heart disease that should bring it up that's

Misha at all conclusion consumption of processed meat but not red meat is associated with higher incidence of heart disease and diabetes these you know so there's a bunch of meta analyses that have been done over the years that reached the same conclusion and we could you know look at the same saying this is for heart disease but there are also some for cancer so it's not just that

steady there are many others as well there are many meta-analyses on the other side so you can present studies here so the people listen true there are bad analyses on the other side soon present you can present the data the people listening and it appears like the proponent sentences that but your guidelines for diet they're not in alignment for saturated fat they're not in diary for cholesterol they're not in diet for the amount of carbohydrates for normal people they're not in line with the consensus for carbohydrates

Ted a range of carbohydrates could be a problem going first of all I'm saying is you are not in alignment with the scientific consensus and you claim that we cherry pick the in the film right but you handpick studies to back up your bias not to mention that we've pointed out that the studies in those meta Nazis some of them are heavily funded by industry not saying that you should throw those out but you don't have the wherewithal to assess the studies in the meta-analysis because you point out yourself you can't even read a forest plot so he reads conclusions right he needs can

allusions in writing but has not looked at the actual data

so you haven't been able to establish when I was like spent the first thousand hours I would look at the whole paper and then I would look at each author and I would dig into each author to see where their funding was from and I'm telling you that the industry is funding studies to sway things in their favor and you point the shows that you don't have your fingers no doubt about that why didn't you point those last time you're at why did you point to an industry funded study thank every one of those before why why

nutria rat study you know when it was clearly invalid the scientists they wait not clearly invalid

it wasn't representative of the scientific evidence they hand-picked the studies that are including they used a poor McVeigh used a grade methodology know what a great method I do okay and it was and you think that's appropriate for assessing food rather than posting the same nutrition organizations there's including while very few it's not a scientific consensus so what is the National Academy of Johnny

it just basically they use the methodology that wasn't appropriate for looking at what they were looking at it's just the same with the Siri to Reno and the Chowdhury studies that the what they were looking for could never have been found the association between saturated fat and cholesterol levels it could never have been found with based on the methodology that they used but again we still have got with that we slam got to protein and I think that's good but let's see so so

the it's absolutely true I've never claimed that there aren't studies showing correlating red meat with rice or Michelle doc so you show the ones that your favorite I'd never have claimed that and I've said those studies are highly problematic for all of the reasons that we have talked about on the last show and on previous shows healthy user bias problems with data collection food frequency questionnaire there's relative versus absolute risk confounding like you know

not looking at physical activity in the biggest confounder of all not looking at diet quality so we're out of diet quality because I know you like to use matlin's work which has never been published which obviously was built in what you liked or not use mountain lions we recorded that connection with diak what I'm talking about food patterns like healthy food pattern eating the heating vents to the internal nutrient density which is a part of diet quality you have referred to mount the lungs work

we're going we can I'm happy to talk about that I'm talking about no that's problems with I'm still talking about the the research on read me being problematic because it doesn't consider the overall diet patch right but again your views first of all you don't have the wherewithal to interpret the scientific evidence which is very clear that you don't understand Forest plots there how can you be when you recognize that you have to look at the totality of evidence you have to have to dig in and look at where the things are

Anton you yourself said I am not an expert in nutrition and you said again I'm not either and which I don't even know why we're sitting here having this discussion honestly we should get some real experts in we could do that too and I can you know we can you can you can point on your side who you think the experts are and I'll point on our side who we think the experts are I mean I don't even like to say sighs really because to me it's not really my position like I think your position is a lot better than the standard American diet the opposition is really like the carnivores right well your position yeah that's the opposite the your

even though is in defense of your film yeah I'm gonna film and I think our response to his critique and how do you think I'm doing so far well with B12 was a homerun for sure well I think there's lots of other things but well the thing about we still haven't really shown whether or not there's evidence that see that's the problem with all this stuff when you're dealing with these epidemiology studies it's so hard to figure out what's what I agree what what it what are these people eating ones people are they drinking are they doing drugs

like what is the overall health quality based I agree and that's why they look at how much of it is based on the diet so that's why we look at scientific consensus could you just bring up slide one because I do you agree with him where you dispute what he's saying about scientific consensus would you agree that you're not and Lambda scientific consensus

my my general dietary recommendations yeah probably some aspects of it but not all aspects but generally I mean come on guys I don't think that when you think the scientific consensus Chris what do you think the scientific consensus is when it comes to dietary recommendations well it's changed a little bit in the past few years definitely was low fat although that is changing a little bit I personal recognition of different fats different you know may have

for an effect etcetera and I would be limiting red meat would be limiting saturated fat limiting cholesterol eating a lot of plants and Whole Foods limiting you know limiting sugar and refined science this is scientific insights legumes but hold on please what is that based on what do you think that's based on

that's based on you know mostly observational research and then some mechanistic studies and recommended some rcts but even rcts if you're comparing again like some of the studies that are cited for example in David Goldman's papers they're comparing a standard American diet with a plant-based diet so in a random in a crossover trial randomized trial that's not comparing

Apples to Apples but anyways to get back to your question I would say about half of what I have what I recommend is consistent if we use the factors that I just said eating Whole Foods and not eating processed and refined Foods limiting sugar all of that the areas where I differ are red meat saturated fat but not always I think they're that's individual and depends on how people actually respond to saturated fats yeah

and eggs and total fat or content depending on the group legumes and Grains I think they are they can be part of a healthy diet if they're well tolerated and you do think that like the research has shown a whole food plant-based diet versus 10 American diet people are getting improvements on that yeah no I think that everybody I definitely think there should be more standard American than some people I found don't do well with grains and legumes especially people with digestive issues so you know

for them maybe not but I don't I've never argued what that grains and legumes are you know like I'm not a Paleo restrict paleo kind of advocate and you pointed out lost time for the it was wrong to Patrick that the talking about it to help you out what your podcast and you know you pointed out by these Homedics stresses that we talked about earlier and so you know these people that are talking about anti nutrients in food the written a little red herring right because they don't know what they're talking about and yeah it's really common

thing and they're basically look the landscape of food is enormous the landscape of dietary requirements and of Health its enormous and you know just you talking about spending thousands and thousands of hours combing over this research can attest to that yeah and Chris I think you can as well I mean we're this is a very complicated issue and there's a certain amount of bio of Bio variability different people have different physical requirements different nutritional requirements but I think we're trying to zoom

on what is actually bad for you and what is actually good for you I think we agree on I think we all agree everyone here agrees that you basically need a certain amount of vegetables in your diet you need vitamins whether you can get those vitamins from supplements like B12 supplements or whether you can get it from the actual food that you eat your certain dietary requirements that I think we're all in agreement on sure I think where we disagree on is whether or not red meat is bad for you and what kind of red meat

were talking about and why you know why is it bad and what what is it bad when it sits alone or is it bad when you're eating it with vegetables which is what we're recommending in the first place so if we're recommending that you eat it with vegetables and these vegetables do have the sort of balancing effect of the negative aspects of the perceived negative aspects even though there's no evidence that those negative aspects when eaten by itself because we don't really have long-term studies on Carnivore die

people so we I think mostly we're in agreement here you're you're defending your film well write this and I think there's a bunch of claims that are untrue well I'm also proven with the B12 issue that he said some things that made you look like you were saying things that were inaccurate and in informed he's done that a bunch of other things too though okay and so you did it with protein let's go to protein and therefore we can I just show what the consensus actually is on diet yes okay so can you just bring up slide one and I mentioned this earlier

earlier but I didn't show it

so so the World Health Organization recommends that people eat a nutritious diet based on a variety of foods or agenting mainly from plants rather than animals which you said you could agree with right because it's like not vegan necessarily like mainly from plant yeah I mean like the proportions are a question mark there depending on and then the actually slide 3 would be the FAO the food and agriculture organization of the United Nations greatly planned vegetarians including Reader's Digest

this is Academy of nutrition and dietetics okay appropriately appropriately planned vegetarian including vegan diets or healthful nutritionally adequate and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases that's a weird appropriately planned as a weird way of phrasing what that is and it's also a little bit in fact because it sort of it sort of it sort of says like what if you if you eat an omnivorous diet doesn't need to be probably pansy whatever the hell you want yes good point these diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle including pregnancy lactation infancy childhood

childhood adolescence older adulthood and for athletes so these women that you hear that are getting arrested because their babies are malnourished because they're following a vegan diet appropriately planned is to keep that I would agree with that said that at the beginning of the last of the show yeah they're I acknowledge that they're very healthy high-performing vegans you know people and plant-based diets right if they do it right and if and if there's someone that's to take your advice what they have to do that Ryan plan

would it just be like I think everybody agrees that your plan out your diet if you want to eat properly you gotta have a plan right I've got a plan to go to the grocery store you got a plan to get the right foot there are some nutrients that are of you know potentially bigger concern I think on vegan vegetarian into that so we just church two more slides on the proposal of evidence so slide very completely agree with appropriately plan okay that sounds so we recognize that if you as long as you plan it while you have B-12 you get a wide variety of foods

it's the same one none other the slide off the bat I meant for omnivores to like here we go we want people to be thinking about what they're eating huddle and I'm really planning most people are eating a bunch of crap so here we go the Academy of nutrition and dietetics the American Heart Association and the 2015-2020 dietary guidelines for Americans recommend appropriately planned vegetarian diets for improved health

that's a statement by Frank who is the current chair of nutrition David looking at my base lies in cardiovascular health and then slide to is the FAO so I got this slides in the wrong order is the FAO I don't know what messed up with the doesn't look like that on my page anyway household should select predominantly plant-based diets rich in a variety of vegetables and fruits pulses and legumes which again a lot of people on the paleo diet would says is useless and minimally processed start you staple foods the evidence that such diets will prevent or delay a significant proportion of

non-communicable disease chronic diseases is consistent so all I'm pointing out here is that you're not in line with the consensus of Science and that you don't have the ability to read the papers that's what I'm pointing out and so I'm in line with pretty much everything that has been shown just just then there's only one of only one of the paragraphs that you mentioned even mentioned animal products and one and it didn't recommend excluding them entirely so

so you would point out that one you agree that predominantly plant-based is the way to go and there's always you plan it appropriately vegan diets can be helpful because it yes I agreed I said as much that vegan diets can be helpful on the first show on the first thing show if they're appropriately planned and I don't know you know predominantly plant-based again if you look at the plate and we see mostly plants there and then animal products then yeah but that's that's a good thing about a bit too sometimes calories

don't you know that do you agree by calories then no okay so you're not in line with the science certificates a consensus agreement I'm not in alignment with that because there's nothing on the predominately getting your calories from plants which is the scientific consensus you're not with saturated fat and cholesterol and a bunch of other things heme iron but anyway so can we get a protein because we're really here to defend like to defend his critiques of the film's because you know honestly I've got people that watch the film change the diet study feeling better watch this podcast where he

debunks the film and called me a liar you know like write me a message on Instagram saying you are full of shit you shouldn't read comments here actually it was an ink you know as an Instagram like a message don't need that anyway but anyway I'm just saying like it's a shame that you have someone that doesn't really have the capability to really understand the literature coming on here and people buying into it talking smack on the film where you met he made a bunch of factually wrong comment so I was talking about was first getting the protein for sure

and again I like

I'm not even the one that's qualified like if I'm beating him on some arguments like what do you think you would get if you had a real nutrition expert in here like I'm not qualified I do this I would like to see it okay so can I just your concerns with the protein and just make sure I'm understanding your argument protein quantity and protein quality and within protein quality it would be the amino acid profile and the digestibility is that fair those are your issues with is into consideration of proteins are important wrong

same page for what we're discussing right

so I just don't know where you and again not saying that it's not possible to get enough protein quantity right and quality and mix of amino acids in if you're really on it right but here's well-planned just like therefore if any other day it was well planned

I think it's less it's less likely that you'll get protein right on a completely vegan diet without it is on a diet that contains animal protein it's more complicated it's not it's not more complicated what it is if you just you don't know yet if you don't know what you're doing and you've been eating a certain way for 30 years and you suddenly take your meat off the plate and you only eat what was left on the plate you're going to have a presence more complicated right exactly what I was thinking but resources on our website of knowledge and

nothing about that is pretty low in my experience right now I agree and that's why we go I agree yeah I agree think people need more resources to make better informed decisions about their health about their exercise and so on I agree what's your position on what he said about protein okay so you this are just quoting you from last time and you really put me through a lot of hours of extra work now it's gone from about 3,000 like 3100 you know anyway so there's just so much wrong with what you said that I just had to go

in to eat every single topic but anyway so three ounces of you said three ounces of 90% lean ground beef

do you think the animal fat is not good for you

because all of a sudden now Chris is a somebody say something about protein content what was the statement in the film frame of film ground beef everything that for protein content oh no no the statement of felt was the most common actually door it's not good it's not actually no cities anywhere from grass-fed beef which is what I advocate okay that is generally leaner okay great but was specifically talking about protein condo I know that's what we're going to go into right okay so it doesn't

ground beef okay so basically what I had said and I might be a comment exact words that I said but I pretty much do because I recorded a number of times so one cup of cooked lentils or a peanut butter sandwich has about as much protein as three ounces of beef or three large eggs that was what I said okay I might be off in a word but that was what I said okay I said about as much protein okay

so you go on to say three ounces of 90% lean ground beef will already what you did is you picked leaner beef but you know even though you don't advocate for that you don't think the animal fat is bad so what you did is you picked the leanest beef anyway you say has 24 grams of protein I'm not sure what your sources but he does advocate for grass-fed beef grass-fed beef is leaner so if he's talking about what he does advocate for the doesn't make sense is right three ounces of ground lean meat okay but the thing is the point in the film or the most people

I'm saying that most people yeah I thought you were saying if any what we saw in the film right here saying regular standard American ground beef he gets was much less about what we're trying to point the point of this thing was not to say this is the best foods that we it's just so like he's writing a comparison the regular stuff that you eat like a peanut butter sandwich people think no protein at all right thank you know people think that plants have no protein the first question you get asked well where do you get your protein so I said it's got about as much protein so you say then on by the way I'd listen to your 30-minute podcast trying to take down the

um which came out before you came on just broadcast and you said that you and you sort of back this up I don't know this happened like from one article and it got spread and spread and spread that someone said you need 5 tablespoons of peanut butter to get the same amount of protein

in what world does someone and you changed your tune a little bit when you came on the podcast but in when I'm making peanut butter sandwich I used bread two pieces of bread how many like there's like you would you choose a bread and peanut butter sandwich I think that's what is happening by definition right that's pretty much our sure so what you do on your podcast you admit that a tablespoon of peanut butter is 4 grams right okay and what is 4 times 5 20

right and and then by per USDA how much is a one piece of whole wheat bread

four or five depending on the source you look at our great how many pieces of bread to yeah okay so five grams of protein in bread thought the one I actually have a homosexual alms but let's take USDA okay hope five five plus five is Kristen 10 plus 20 from the peanut butter is 30

well even on the leanest beef that you chose it was 24 grams why did you say you needed 5 tablespoons of peanut butter and I know how it came about because I think what you do is you take other people's work like Denise manga and all these other people you read their articles and you take their arguments because some of the stuff that you're on your site is very reflective of people's other arguments on other sites so there was something that started where people started saying you need 5 tablespoons of peanut butter and in the first article it said without the bread now I don't know why you don't include bread in when you make a sandwich because

most people do it's not just peanut butter and I almost bought a peanut butter sandwich in here today to show you what two tablespoons of peanut butter looks like or two and a half because one I had I looked at it and it was just surprising like when you actually measure a real tablespoons actually not that much peanut butter and like some mine I've figured out has about like two and a half tablespoons and two pieces of bread my bread has like six grams Burger so my paintings I like 22 grams of protein anyway widespread would be more like 2 or 3 grams about not right back again like we showed a piece of home

we bet on that we're advocating eating mostly Whole Foods that's a whole grain no one is saying we even said in the film if we want to cherry-pick we just try and push plants we said white sugar and flat white flour bad for you sociated with weight gain that carbohydrates from whole food sources are insulated with better lean body mass lower body fat percentage and everything else but anyway so I don't understand your math what I think it is you took that article because articles that spread from that article forgot to put the bit in parentheses about without the two pieces of bread so you take five tablespoons of peanut butter

four grams a piece that's 20 grams right which is around what pieces of bread 10 grams so why did 24 grams of your hand-picked lean beef which you don't even necessarily like there's no reason that you should be picking that when that's not what we showed in the film why are you comparing 24 grams to 30 grams why don't you say 4 tablespoons of peanut butter fair enough fair enough got it wrong again okay so this is what it's frustrating when I watch the show because like every five minutes I'm hearing something that just factually incorrect

that's why I hear that's why I'm here now again pressure to both of you so can we just look at actual the breakdown of all these different things

so again the percentage is have 20 to 22 grams but that's maybe a little bit more than there's something the other argument was the quality of the projects that but quantity first so if you go to Brad on slide 5 I don't need to do this you've agreed you've agreed right okay so and lentils if you want to do slide 8 I don't know sorry what you haven't agreed on is I'm going to say 2 tablespoons of peanut butter and two piece of bread

okay fair enough say for what I'm going to say like the comparison roughly I need to put a bit more in the proton Cannon yeah I'm gonna showcase O3 3 tablespoons sir can you just three and a half tablespoons of peanut butter and two pieces of bread no no no I'm going to show you how far I'm going to I'm going to back up what I said in the film so I let's just go through the slides quickly that's okay so slide 5 and apologies to all the listeners who don't get to stick to my slides

on the go to YouTube yeah here we go so this is USDA so I don't know where your numbers from but I went to the USDA site and fortunately it changed in October so it's not quite the same as when we were making the film but anyway one slice of bread 5 grams of protein and you accepted that right hmm okay good peanut butter 2 tablespoons 8 grams you accepted that you accept that two tablespoons of peanut butter has 8 grams yeah okay we could have more I have like more whatever look at there we go so you

you agree that 18 grams of protein for the peanut butter that's the sandwich which is shown in the film whole wheat bread peanut butter okay so the next slide and again I'm being very conservative on this like in the mount so now look at lentils one cup Seventeen point nine grams of protein that is USDA again would you accept that yeah I haven't looked at this but it's like it's like yeah I know that a large you can see on the left side why except yes years is absolutely okay good for us but you accept USDA when it

the best but not in terms of the recommendations

we're talking about yeah for talking about quantity of my creative control and so on the same page with this is something that's been clearly measured this is not something like recommendations now okay so but we're on the same page we're taking this as ass okay okay so now if we go to slide 9 and I'm sorry the one that you just had the one with guy Jamie yeah there we go so three eggs 18 grams of protein what do you say so far we've got about as much

protein in the peanut butter sandwich with two tablespoons not the five that you collects less I mean 18 is not 24 no no I don't think I'm getting to the beef I'm saying so far what I have presented just the two tablespoons of peanut butter

and it's came to 18 I was really conservative right I could have put more peanut butter I could have had bread that had more like the one I don't want any brand okay children but you did make that you can get bread that's got six grams of protein sure okay so I'm being really conservative just to sort of prove a point

but you so far we've had a peanut butter sandwich with only two tablespoons of peanut butter and when it seriously try that at home Joe like actually measured with a measuring yeah well I talked about in the podcast I would probably have about five okay so anyway I probably would too three large eggs 3 large eggs okay so the 18 grams and I'll go to organic this is all organic ground beef standard organic brown video answers so react to the Seventeen point five grams if you want to

if you want to get into it and get into like because that's per hundred grams so I can show you what's the fat percentage 9.2 grams

so it's 1/2 AB not no it's not no sorry it's nine point two grams per 100 grams so we had to do the calculation oh but that okay but this is the regular organic ground beef if you throw this in the neighborhood of and then what should we say x I knew you'd bring up a grass-fed beef so that I found the lowest and the highest okay okay so go to grass-fed beef slide 11

three ounces this is on the very low end so this is probably the fattiest meat but you wouldn't be against animal fat right

not typically depends on the person and their we just talked about protein there anyway Louis 14.4 on the highest end

I actually think my number 18 grams

okay so peanut butter sandwich 18 grams lentils 17.9 can we round it up yeah three eggs 18 grams okay

three hours of beef 18 grams at best

right when I looked up grass-fed beef so if you going to lean you can have more protein no doubt so you can find Protein that's got higher I said about I was trying to show that dispel the myth that you know plants have no protein and animal foods have all this protein

so I've just shown you there now your second point was that the problem with his second point was a problem with a peanut butter sandwich to get 18 grams of protein I think this is a fair point you would have to eat for four hundred and ten calories right so if you go to slide is actually the more important point because I'm not necessarily you know that may not be a problem for somebody who's training no no yes no I know but can we finish going shopping so

for you like bring up slide 15 so you admit that you can get like a decent our protein your argument was you can get like percentage so slide 15 the lentils for 18 grams of protein again if you want to check this calculation stop at any time I'm fine I have had this triple-checked okay 18 grams of protein 231 calories okay because you like point and I love that people like to point out the beef and in the peanut butter sandwich and try and compare those even though we were right on the protein now you're trying to pick on the

calories so you didn't pick the lentils which have 231 calories the next one slide 16 has it does about the same for beef which about 210 calories grass-fed beef in the first instance

grass-fed beef in the first inning slide 17 275 calories and that was on the the one that wasn't totally and 70% lean beef and I'm just pointing out there's different ranges

417 case for 18 grams of protein right so fatty meat which you don't think like the animal fat is bad right no okay so Santa gets so again there's a dependency he's probably about the protein percentage there was less in my penis like there was more protein percentage wise in my peanut butter sandwich and there was in the green beef and then the last not last one yeah we could have picked something with less calories so if we pick tempo for example slide 19

hundred seventy calories

so again would you say but I think his argument was the argument the argument was the quality of the program no no there was too much party other part of it was you would have to consume more calories every just before it can I just pray at one point yeah so the first part was you can't like you can't there's nowhere near as much protein and then there was like always based on the calories so the percentage of protein is you would have to have more calories to get the same amount of protein which is not recommend we don't have to you have to okay so you made a mistake again so it's not a central part of

my argument was a pot I was it was a part of it not quality yeah in quality and the quantity was broken down to two things you just can't get as much for like you know chunk as much in that surveying the totally wrong you'd have type tablespoons of peanut butter totally wrong agree agree that you can affect your 5 tbsp right thank you okay and then you also said that you have to have so many calories that you couldn't get it and you were wrong again agree

for the peanut butter sandwich or just in general just in general from plant foods from Iraq yeah I agree to have a hundred calories of lentils sweet potato and leek omelette from Chris's site where the protein is going so this is from your site 18 grams of protein 410 calories the funny thing is I typed in recipes and I think it was either first or second came up I all I do is pick the first two high protein recipes from your site because I didn't pick the

for this Alex about be unfair so I picked the first couple so sweet potato and leek omelet the protein coming from eggs 18 grams of protein for and 10 guys do you have an issue with your own meal no so do you have an issue with a peanut butter sandwich having 400 calories no

okay second one I said that wasn't Central to my point there was a Senator is the same time to get this the same quantity which is not which is not would you just admit it's not quality which is risk or we're getting the DS going a minute and I will show that you were wrong again so Tara and bacon hash slide 21

18 grams of protein 570 calories if you want to go to your breakfast of champions which I thought you know for athletes slide 22

and by the way I took your data I didn't take USDA I assumed that you were not lying so I took the totals from the bottom and but I standardized it for 18 grams of protein because we're just comparing everything percentage-wise 600 calories do you think that people should not eat that meal

depends on who you're talking about but not slow down slow protein but it's low protein right I don't think that people shouldn't eat it was attack is it low protein relevant rely on it for years it's not rely on that for your approach right so first of all it's low protein by like most people's standards but your stands of protein a much higher so that would be far off so that would mean to make up for the rest of the day you would have to have meals that were like almost just protein or maybe they'd have to buy the protein powder from your website

in order to make that up anyway so let's move on to now the by the way slide 23 largest study ever done comparing completely plant-based Leaders with

extensive studies showing plant-eaters versus me 75 grams a day that was the average and she's supposed to have one gram per body weight per pound of bodyweight know you don't like that's at the upper end for athletes okay so this is Justice pointed grab this is this is how much they're actually getting the largest study ever done comparing plan B's dealers so you can see it's about the same and actually per pound of lean body mass fat free Mass the vegans were getting slightly more because they had better body mass index there was light Lena but anyway just wanted

thanks it's roughly similar so your next argument was the athletes need more protein so right now it wasn't an argument because you admitted that I pointed out in the show yeah so if you go to slide 22 no 24

I just want to point in bringing about the amount that we're actually requiring we're going into the amount now we're still we're in a were in a mount for athletes because his point is like maybe you can get enough to survive but not to be an athlete so I'm going to look at I don't think that was his point I think his point was that he is a different requirement on our own on for athletes yeah there's a difference between knowing what you want to survive we went argue on this point your point is you need more his recommendations though what he does is he pushes them to a really high-end that isn't consensus showing that then trying to make it out that it

harder to get which we've already shown you can get enough protein for you know of course in athletes more calories therefore they get more protein as a percentage so I just wanted to show two positions on this and then we can see if you again you don't agree with the consensus of science so this is the joint position paper of the Academy of nutrition and dietetics the dietitians of Canada and the American College of sports medicine so this is for athletes okay this is just one I'm going to show you another and second do you want to read it out Joker's shortly might get bored of my voice heard it

this suggests that dietary protein intake necessary to support metabolic adaptation repair Remodeling and for protein turnover generally ranges from 1 Point 2 2 2 point 0 grams or kilograms per day okay and then the next slide Jamie if you could bring up slide I have I agree with that and have it in my okay I want to make sure we're on the same page okay protein supplementation be on a total daily protein intake of 1.2 grams kilograms definitely

the wrong one why are you reading that from the big Square protein supplementation to know I said 1.6 didn't okay now you said one point to two grams you read the thing that from the last thing I don't like that did I really do that that's pretty Genie that doesn't make any sense okay so this is what was inside me right read again yeah okay I thought I read 1.6 I didn't that's what you heard your 1.6 I'll maybe I thought you said one or two to tell when no I don't even know what he does protein supplementation be on a total daily protein

take of 1.6 the squiggle means about okay about 1.6 grams kilograms a day during rets Reserve resistance exercise training provided no further benefit on gains in muscle mass or strength and there's like really highly and if you look at the and I'll I'm not no I'm not saying I'm perfect kilogram or kilograms to pounds of body weight to point 2 to point to so we're 1.6 grams so it's less than a gram of the point seven two seven two seven two grams per pound your

so you're looking at about three quarters of a gram per pound recommended anything over that provided no game but I want to clarify so you can see the two phase breakpoint analysis on the top right this chart yes okay so you can see that you can see as the chart goes up and then it flattens out there was no further gains in fat free Mass which is the y-axis and after 1.6 however there's a cops and go to confident interval like how confident are they that these findings are correct and it was a very wide

interval so it actually took it there was six grams you decide so it was actually up to two point two and down as low as 1 so it's 1 to 2 point to the other one the academy nutrition nutrition dietetics and the Academy of sports medicine 1.22 so the widest range is 1 to 2 point 2 so some so you think that this like recommendation that's a standard thing that you hear in a gym one gram per pound of but it's probably just switch it that's that's a jab the upper end so to your point 2 point 2 grams

the upper end the two point two grams per per kilogram of body weight per day is one gram per pound of body weight so no doubt and this is what you talking about certain athletes and bodybuilders strength athletes where confidence interval means to apply to everybody some people can actually build Optimum and this is about optimally building muscle as fast as possible right and some people can do it one gram some people might do want to but like regular it look like 1.6 1.8 like the scientific consensus that and you said that you agree with these ranges of the scientists understand there's some

then suggesting that higher amounts may be beneficial so if you go to Jamie if you search for examined.com how much protein do you need there's an article there and examine.com is a do you know about about them so I know that this planet panel of scientists or a group of scientists group of scientists right not not the American College of sports medicine the indicator and right indicator amino acid oxidation meth

David which is newer if you scroll down Jamie to the optimal daily protein intake for athletes and similarly active adults or if you just click on that you see in that paragraph iao studies and athletes found different numbers because for of the 49 studies in the meta-analyses meta-analysis that had that range lower range were conducted in people with

it's training experience the other 45 were newbies I have studies found different numbers female athletes required 1.42 1.7 male endurance 2.12 2.7 a mature male body builders to the same point this is the average amount of protein probably got some Iowa maximize lean mass is about 1.6 grams per kilogram it's the same exact as I said I don't even need to argue it's like totally accepted yes Sports World like whatever it's like it's also says some people

people need upwards of two point two grams per kilogram for those interested in comprehensive breakdown and provides another link so we're in the range we're not far off on this it says regular trainings male endurance athletes require 2.12 2.7 grams per kilogram so that's the high range

yeah and so and you could you did say something about 2.3 23.3 and one in member in one study you pointed out that was just doesn't actually help you build more muscle mass but if you're trying to lean out yeah yeah yeah and also I think some of the studies that you've looked at that look at like there's one at 2.3 I've actually got it on my computer I don't have in my slides but there's one at two point one two three point three you've got him out there's two things about that one it's when you're in a clock deficit because of gluconeogenesis you pull some of the protein and you create you know you use some of the engine so there's less protein

unless for building so if you're a bodybuilder cutting for competition trying to get down to like 4 or 5 percent then your protein requirements go up above that's normal range because you're basically using certain clock that is actually using some more fuel and that's also the case with those carnivore people in a lot of Quito people as well right yeah they probably adapt some because like normal people you can actually only during exercise you can only get 10% of your energy from the oxidation of protein into glucose but so the where we going so the 2.3 23.1 by the way

one in caloric deficit and it's to based on fat free Mass qualifications it's not based on total body weight which is what all the recommendations are on so that the 2.3 the 3.1 in some of these studies if you did like okay if someone's 15% body fat write it down write it wouldn't be 2.3 23.1 screenplay one based on thinking about 200 pounds when you've got 20% body fat you only weigh 260 pounds for this calculation got it anyway where we are so you like to talk about the I/O in terms of these recommendations and if you

slide 102 Jamie how am I doing by the way defending the film excellent

you really doing really well good not bad for a dumb old UFC fighter right you're not that old 41 going great I just thought you'd look at what I did to the top of my head this morning I cut it I just thought I'd lost them coming months how much protein in the body using a single meal for muscle building implications for daily protein distribution showed operator of c 1 of 2 point 2 grams per kilograms a day and cohort of young male body builders all of the method of assessment

the caterer amino acid oxidation technique used in this study has not received Universal acceptance for determining optimal protein requirements so it's in that same range so I'm yeah but I'm not a couple things I'm not trying to point out that your I/O is off I'm saying if you want to take your I/O the indicator amino acid oxidation index if you want to use that then the upper confidence or is still 2.2 so the scientific consensus I just want to like make it very clear that you threw out a bunch of these numbers on high protein making out

vegans couldn't hit that level first of all I've shown that food can get that I've shown that vegans can get sufficient protein and I've shown that I've shown the levels that the scientific consensus on the protein ranges for athletes and not inside a consensus with these three point three but even if they were there's no reason you couldn't get it on a plant-based diet in argue that everyone should be eating three point three grams now but yeah but you did argue made out that vegans can get enough protein and you were wrong I didn't say they couldn't get enough I said that it's less likely that they will get it

not the repeated it like some of those recipes on your website the beginning less so you're being disingenuous Chris like first recipe was there was sweet potatoes right was it was that it was had eggs in it was a second one okay there's a sweet potato and leek omelet it was a Catalan bacon hash and then it was breakfast of champions with milk yogurt and eggs so all I'm saying is people that Watch the last episode where he was bashing the film people walked away thinking you can't get enough protein and then

they thought the quality is not good enough and now we can get into that let's get into that let's get into that because this is the Crux of it right yes it's like you can get all the teams real acid content about protein first of all B12 is an argument smash that protein is the next argument I've just smashed the protein quantity argument and now we'll get into the pocket we certainly smash the protein quantity versus caloric intake right and so it's fat to say is it fair to say that based on what I've presented

you can get about as much protein from the things that I said well based on what you presented you haven't lost an argument yet there's not one thing that you said that that thank you that's incorrect and I even agree if you're going to eat some meat should be some out the 100 yourself so let's get into the gate when I love this I was like really like doing like researching for this I really enjoyed it because there were so many flaws that I was just like I love I will

true Seeker right so ice went for the search of the truth in combat Bruce Lee would say researcher on experience absorb what is useful reject what is useless add what is specifically your own I don't care about all the George Dielman you know like BS about you can knock people out I don't care about that I don't care about all these traditional styles of martial arts I care about what is the truth before I did this you know I thought oh yeah painted that makes sense I actually switched grass-fed beef and because they made a 6-meter three ratios I started eating a chicken but then I read the research

and I wasn't biased by like anything other than finding out the truth being the optimal diet for health and athletic performance and Recovery in my injuries and that is the truth and that is what I have done and now we're going to expose how you were incorrect about the protein quality so you said what's a little disingenuous about the film they said every plant has every amino acid or yeah nobody disagrees with that but it does have does it have enough of each of them well first of all people do disagree with that if you want to search

which does you know plants have missing amino acids people think that it's missing some of the nine essential amino acids so that's why we put that in the film okay and we did and I set you left off part of my coil I said every plant has every amino acid that's what you said but you left off the end of my quote which said every plant has every amino acid in varying proportions that is what I said and you left out the in varying proportions which again I think is disingenuous he did not complete my quote you hand-picked part of my quote to represent your view so people murmur

on do think that plants are completely so a lot of people think just like you know that people are there's articles saying where no one thinks that protein gives them energy I've got five studies here the only five studies that I could find on the knowledge of Collegiate athletes and around 50 percent in each of the studies think that protein is what gives you energy so people were saying like why did you put that in the film that's a straw man people don't think the protein gives the energy about 50% of Collegiate athlete think that protein gives you energy that's why I dressed in the film anyway back to you like the DIA

right there just digestible indispensable amino acid school or the pdcaas which preceded it either of those right so it can you just mention why you like it and you know what the benefits are on how its determine how is it tournament so the benefit the DIA s takes into consideration amino acid profile and bioavailability and how is it how is it just how do you study a does

did not take into consideration by looks at crude protein it looks to the total amount of protein absorption not the individual amino acids because different Amino in different immediate different individual amino acids absorb differently so that was one of the benefits of the DS scoring record DS and PD Castle whatever so but how is it determined Chris you know how it's determined the DS I don't know the details

I'm sorry I'm sorry it's like it's just it's like it's almost like comedy

that someone is talking about these systems that does not know how key so slide 27 and I tell you one of the benefits of the DIA is so and I think you might have mentioned this I think you might know more than you're letting on so one of the benefits is the Oro ileal digestibility so the pdcaas right that took the whole digestive tract to what came out and we looking at here so look at this so this is how the gis is brought about so basically past the ilium you can't digest your body doesn't absorb the protein

really it's digested by the bacteria right so this is one of the benefits of the DIA s versus the pdcaas right the old system is that they saw how much protein went through the whole digestive tract but that wasn't reasonable right because past the ileum you're not digesting the protein the bacteria dressing and you're not getting it does that make sense yes so basically they put a poor in the pig now pdcaas was mostly in rats and this is done in rats and there's some in humans but it's mostly done in pigs because it's a more similar

82 humans and they basically assessing how much of that protein was absorbed right and how much of the amino acids were absorbed now some people make the argument even the FAO point out the flaws some people make the argument well pigs have a different digestibility rate which is true and they have a different amino acid profile requirement different so some people would say there for DS bunch of crap right I'm not going to make that argument even though it's totally stuffed animals primarily not Inhumans they've got a different amino acids requirement and different

capability okay so I mean dude would you think of that score is the best one to use with humans it doesn't make sense right but I'm not going to even make that argument I'm going to go with you and say okay DS is the best thing out there okay okay so even though you can question it so you've said this is a quote from last time when you were trying to bash the film it's all about protein quality and this as you said is an established science a firmly established science he was talking to you obviously and you must have said it was established they look at this especially in like

third world countries where protein deficiency is common so they try to figure out how to address this

okay now the FAO the food and agriculture organization of the United Nations what is their purpose

Chris to prevent nutrient deficiency thank you Val pink and yeah so long I've got a slide if you want to prove but it's basically defeating hunger providing food security not for America or for England but for like the nation you know the like a hundred and thirty more 130 countries right where people are starving malnutrition that is their purpose so you've got to look at it through the lens of that so if you just put slide 29 but I just want to bring back these claims up I know the slides are getting kind of boring and again apologize for

listening research focusing on protein malnutrition was largely conducted after the identification of clinical course year old girl while she on how your course your core and the realization that many children globally are suffering from subclinical protein malnutrition to address protein malnutrition the composition and digestibility of proteins must be determined as we go to the next slide and this is by the way that was looking at the desk or you can see the top Canada

the ice core decrease protein malnutrition then they go on to say Jody was food and agriculture organization of the United Nations has developed methods to evaluate the protein quality of food items and in 2011 the digestible indispensable amino acids Cordy iaas was recommended as a successor to the previous their previous method okay so we're not in disagreement right now I'm even going to fold go like I'm not going to argue about the animal having different Amino

parents are even though that's like that's pretty funny right like why are you assessing anyway so I'm not going to have that argument I what I'm going to have is I'm going to go with everything so far FAO they're endorsing it over PDS lot of experts endorsing over Dia okay over the PD cast all right so now in slide 31 it's made for Starving Children okay this is what it's made for so I would agree if you're in a caloric deficit and you're in a country where there's very little protein and you're only getting 30 grams of protein a day let's just say that the animal like to

the animal stuff out of it and like the way that the method is flawed okay so FAO points out yeah so let's just say it's legit I would agree I would say eat get your protein from meat I would agree because that's what it was designed for as you can see in looking at post-exercise skeletal muscle the D is does not attempt to consider how scores translate into optimizing more Downstream physiological targets of interest to a Physically Active personal athlete so it wasn't designed for that system it was

for starving people in countries whether we're not getting enough protein and they weren't getting enough protein as you would call high quality okay so so do would you recognize that it wasn't developed for that system yes based on the scientific literature but you're inferring it now for the amount that I still think it's a relevant measure of protein quality because it is no acid profile and digest ileal digestibility yeah it is

is it is in starving country when people are starving I agree but as you can see its highest this is no one looking is still looking at amino acid profile right do you concede that it's looking at the at the relative content of amino acids in a particular food yes and it's looking at the ileal digestibility which I think is an improvement over the I think it's got elements even though the Affairs point out is flaws in 10 years from now we'll have a better system right but

you're great probably 10 years now probably have a better system engine okay but it's the best that it can kind of go off but again it looks at and it's not just my opinion that is not used for that this is like in sports medicine 2019 and I agree you're busy with other stuff you probably haven't seen this article that came out in the in February right have you seen this article will have not seen this particular article so so basically can you look at the now in the 2018 Journal of international sports of Sports Nutrition slide 32 Society of Sports Nutrition

because you like to say it's all about muscle protein synthesis right that's an important factor okay it has been proposed that muscle muscle protein synthesis is maximizing young adults with an intake of 20 to 25 grams of high quality protein about the speed of about about 20 25 grams of a high-quality perfect high-quality protein okay do you disagree that like eating four or five times a day

at 20 to 25 grams of high quality protein whey be whatever you want to take High School whatever under your you know the scoring system you agree with do you agree that that is the amount maximize puzzle close it when it shows that that does for a four-hour window acute muscle protein synthesis yeah most of the Sports organization suggest that for acute protein right and take but if you now again I'm going with the consensus so if you take that 20 to 25 grams 4 or 5 times a day

that what is that that's 8200 that hundred and twenty grams of protein the day is that is that enough rubber gas leak proteins in fact is that enough for like a 250-pound athlete I would say no so I'm not I'm not saying that it is I think you need more protein than that right so on as usual protein synthesis is only one factor I can you tell me what the other factors are

tissue regeneration and repair recovery right yeah okay so I think we're on the wrong the same page that 20 25 grams has basically been shown in a single sitting over four hour window in what we call a cute short term that's been shown to maximize muscle proteins in this and that is because 20 grams and it's been shown actually can get less with like egg you could get like 17 grams or something because basically you're hitting two things you're hitting leucine you're getting one point eight two point one point h 2 grams of leucine which is

if you'd like a foreman right it's like telling the others like hey you should build protein if you don't have any Lucy and if you had all the essential amino acids you want except for leucine you wouldn't have the form and telling all the workers to like build the muscle basically that's what leucine is so you're getting enough leucine and you're getting eight 10 grams of essential amino acids that is what is important in the acute stage of muscle proteins into this you're getting 18 grams of and we can get more granular and like it's you know point zero grams per pound of body weight but it's this

basically accepted in fact they've shown that like even if you're 400 pounds you know you probably you probably don't need any more than 25 grams for some reason there's something in that number about getting the leucine amount doesn't really matter how big you are so there's a small potato beetle that's a you might need a bit more 2.5 or whatever but consensus is the 20 25 grams and aside this is like a long but it's like this in particular like burned down Okay so

by the way just going back to your desk scoring you're basically looking at like a rules for Jiu-Jitsu don't like Aggie jiu-jitsu tournament and you're trying to apply them to mme so just because Jiu-Jitsu is involved in MMA it doesn't mean that a scoring system for like ibjjf or whatever that doesn't mean that that's the best scoring system for MMA right that's fair - aw yeah you could get points for like yeah whatever okay so essentially in this isn't just my opinion okay this is scientific

literature not an article that you just pulled on examiner.com but that's not how science works you just pull up an article so slide 33

and it's very clear this is just very obvious it's not it can't it cannot just be about short term acute muscle protein synthesis right it can't be because you wouldn't be hitting the 1.6 22.2 so this States acute anabolic responses are not necessarily associated with long-term muscle against the topic can only be answered by assessing the results of longitudinal studies that directly measure changes in lean mass with the provision of varying protein dosages

okay so you agree that it's not just about short-term us both nurses okay so what it is Joe it doesn't matter at a certain point it doesn't matter because yeah if let's say you're gonna have four times a day let's say you can have a hundred sixty grams of protein and you have 40 grams right of protein four times a day that's a hundred sixty grams so if you're going to optimize muscle mass

and by the way like how much how much muscle have you put on the last 15 years

Macho Man like I put a nun right basically I'm about the same but anyway let's just save your body build a new and we'll try stack on trying to stack them as much muscle as possible because that's like even like when I get like I'm like 190 or 93 maybe sometimes like if I go over 200 I just feel slow I feel slow the handgun I feel like I just feel slower punching like whatever so it's not everyone's goal is to optimize muscle mass as quickly as possible Right but let's say that your goal is Right clearly it's not enough to do that you have to hit the 1.6 22.2 grams right

once you hit that amount you have to do two things you have to hit the muscle the the short-term leucine threshold and amino acid in the short term right and then you have to hit the engine

so what you have to do two things you have to maximize the muscle poses in the short term and you have to get enough protein during the day right of 1 point 6 to point to is that fair okay so once you hit the 1.6 the 2.2 let's say you have 40 grams it doesn't matter you follow me you even quoted doesn't matter the amino acid profile the food was that was not because as long as you hit the essential amino acid amount and the leucine amount in the fort for me you can hit the leucine amount

amino acid amount in virtually all of these vegan forms of protein is that what you're saying no not if you're having like first of all you could do it with like if you do beans rice and vegetables yeah you'd hit two grams of protein for like five hundred seventy calories now again you could you know that most athletes supplement right yes like I can got slides if you want for scientific proof but you would accept that like an elite athletes even more like over percent so people to submit with protein powder anyway they're supplementing with Branch chain amino acids because it contains Lucy knisley definitely time

yes well over 50% of supplementing with protein powder and a higher percentage of the lease just athletes period yeah okay and how athletes are some men even more it's probably more like so like if your goal is to like do something and like take creatine or you know a protein like you know these athletic Endeavors like you pointed out the thing that Patrick does and we can get into the air by the way the misrepresentation of from Roberto Hearst I'll burst into his you know Patrick's records if you want because there was a lot of claims that were made that were completely false again

so basically if you get enough protein if you hit one of the windows if you hit the 1.6 22.2 with plant protein you can hit the muscle protein synthesis and like all of a sudden he's like oh you're saying there's no benefit in animal protein for an amino acid profile versus plant protein no I'm not not if you're getting enough protein so you're saying if you're getting enough protein for anyone who has no benefit I'm even talking about that but if Ashley and you're getting here

so of as you have acknowledged of the right ratio of plant proteins no no it's probably it's not difficult at all I'm talking about leucine if you like if you were really messing up and eating like people just don't eat healthy and might not get enough Lucy but like if you're planning to become as big and strong as possible and you're dead do you need a specific workout plan business is only assuming that you're taking supplements or sudden everyone's taking sorry you're not achieve no no I'm saying at all no no you can do it with supplements and I'm not like you're not

assuming the people are taking supplements are you can do it but are you assuming that people are taking supplements not you can these guidelines but you can do it on a whole food diet plan try it with with just food with B12 like right supplement B12 nothing else you can achieve the same amino acid profile as me yeah I mean I want to touch on that I'm not saying they're only at that is the argument right that was what I said but I just want to throw people off like depending on where you live you might want to supplement vitamin D based on cognitive Sun shows wanted like gonna like throw everybody should do that anyway

particularly D3 okay so what I'm saying is as long as you get that amount of protein and and again if you're eating if you're exercising to optimally build muscle you're exercising a fair bit right yeah you're burning more calories right right so you eat more calories I don't think I don't know where my sliders we're deep into the woods here and this is getting really good no but here's the question was but in this is what with his assertion was that the amino acid profile of meat is superior really it means

it profile in context and that's why it's one it's important when you look at the FAO and the goals that they're doing to try and stop world hunger it is not important in the Western World number one and not important if you're an athlete and hitting the red you're getting between one point six two two point grams per kilogram so what you're saying is that as long as you're getting this one point six two two point two grams per kilogram of protein whether it's lentils or peanut butter or something that you have enough amino acids to achieve the desired

Schultz yeah and it's essentially the exact same as if you're hitting that 2.2 grams if you're going to point your grams it doesn't matter is that relevant do you think that's true if you're getting two point two grams of protein and you're doing it and you're not doing it in the way that you said where you're not planning it and not getting making sure you're getting enough leucine which is lower we wouldn't have to try basically you're saying is low

Laura and I agree but there's a certain quantity that you will achieve there's a plateau to point to the plateaus were doesn't matter once you've got that amount the other point that you had about protein quality is digestibility so that's the last point that I want to address okay how am I doing good okay so slide 34 because you basically claimed that okay even if there were enough amino acids you can't digest it as well more precise data collected the more precise data collected so far in humans assessing real specific

oral ileal nitrogen digestibility has shown that the differences in the in the digestibility between plant and animal protein sources are only a few percent contrary to historical findings in rats or determinations using less precise methods in humans and just so you know I understand that you haven't seen this probably because it just came out last month published by Stanford so I get you haven't seen him now I'll take this one step further there's only at most like two or three percent different indigestible plant protein

and you know how it's assessed in the pigs they give them raw food so they give raw beans raw grains and you have said one of the reasons that it's less digestible is because of trypsin Inhibitors yeah what happens when and what happens when you cook even definitely break them down

you getting it so when you when you heat food the likelihood is in that hasn't been tested we know that the digestibility is less in Plants by a few percent only a few percent not the foot forty percent versus a hundred percent that he was claiming last time that's old science I'm talking about current science right and there's only a few percent difference and they imagine that not only if you heated it that you would get equivalent you might even get more because you're killing the trypsin Inhibitors by heating it

the whole nonsense about the quantity you were wrong the quality the GRE score was not designed for that it doesn't matter when you get enough protein so as long as you get enough protein you're using measures for a organization that is looking at Hunger I am we're talking about if people have got enough I agree if you're in like a developing country and you have very little diversity of plant foods and maybe not enough and there's manuals you should be eating the animals I agree

re but that is not what it was designed for and it doesn't matter the amino acid profile doesn't matter and the digest me doesn't matter when you get enough protein let me pause you for a second here because you've been going on for a long time yeah laughing that's amazing points Chris this is not been that good for your arguments so what are your thoughts on what he said so far and what are your thoughts on what he's refuted about what you had asserted about his show I think he's made some good points and you know my original argument

and what we started out talking about was so you take the film in the claims of the film The Specific claims of the film and then you also take the the question that we started talking about which was is there evidence that a hundred percent plant-based diet is better than a diet that contains animal foods and do and that's really for the protein come on and there was a lot of clay there were a lot

names in the film that we talked about about you know dairy products causing cancer dairy products contributing to cardiovascular disease chicken and fish causing cancer red meat clogging the arteries that we address and haven't had a chance to go into detail on in this show so but that where you want to study protein and what you just did that you segwayed into something else so can you answer

so definitively do you think I've presented very good arguments against your rebuttal about both protein quality including the amount and the ratio and about protein quality and quantity including digestibility and amino acid scores I think the protein quantity is it still an issue or the question of getting how I mean you've got to have some ideological arguments Chris I'm sorry but you're like I have disproven your rebuttal on protein and

B12 I think the quality and quantity still matter the quality so even though that scale was developed for the FAO there's still a difference a quantitative difference in the amino acid profile didn't argue with that adjustability I didn't argue with that that was not my point

do you know it wasn't good but if it's about amino acids and it's about protein content and digestibility if what he's saying is correct and there really is no need to eat meat that's what this isn't but that just isn't that is his argument for protein I mean you can like come up with some other we can go at nutrient if you want to look at nutrient profiles and like then we can look at that but you've got to admit I've presented some good arguments in both favor of quantity idea and I hadn't seen that last okay from mm so I just want to sum it up I want to sum it up by slide 32

lost light or less

well I mean yeah one well I've got some I got slides proving the outcomes as well but if you just want to look at this is not me it's not me making up like a psycho I'm a vegan I'm just making stuff up like there's a bunch of bullshit that's put out by vegans about arguments that are totally buried yeah and honestly I think vegans are like the worst people for their own movement I agree it's like throwing blood on people that are wearing like fur jackets or whatever and it's ridiculous right but that doesn't don't dis don't lump me in and the film in with

vegans and John a far better job of explaining things here than you did even in the film yeah but it's very tricky very tricky because you don't have a lot of time is worth three and a half hours in Rockwell I would have made a 10 hour film and I it was upset assure you would have people say oh you for example a couple argument made

half of the athletes you filmed you didn't put in the film because they stopped being vegan completely not true you're also a bunch of experts we didn't put in the film that we couldn't put in and we didn't put them in because there wasn't room it was like I understand in filmmaking it's called killing your babies there was amazing scenes that were being really convincing that we couldn't put in like the evidence in the film is far less than 1% of the evidence that I did you guys do it as like a Netflix thing where you just are like wild because Wild Country we D like 7 hours I would

this way consistent doesn't go wiser thing to do because it happened like how many people are going to sit down honey even people going to watch this well I know I'm here I mean I don't know why I just feel Millions so when we're talking about like we don't really have that much time left unfortunately because we are here at three and a half hours in and I have another one right after this but what what about the film do you think he hasn't refuted your criticism we just put that last flight oh yes please what is it again it's like 34

also I've got a bunch of slides showing that actually here we go there's no research to suggest that protein recommendations are different for athletes allow following a vegetarian diet then for those on an omnivorous diet now that is the handbook the textbook that is used when you become a board certified specialist in sports dietetics so this with this is basically saying is what you said earlier the the amino acid profile once you reach a certain point in a certain amount of grams per tonne we've got to reach that amount anyway even with meat that's the thing okay so it's yeah so and

again what about the film do you think that he hasn't refuted your criticisms

I mean we can guy I would like to become a productive that's going to be there's the blood flow and endothelial function automation there let's get to the meat and let's do it let's do the Iraq what is your answer that's the most scientific part of the movie

what was it was the other thing Chris

well I mean just talking about inflammation and endothelial function will take the chicken and fish and cancer cancer I can review all of that all of your Claims can we want to look at the direction in the Dolphins think they're related to endothelial function let's what if we talk about research about endothelial function yeah okay right okay that's related so okay endothelial cells so regarding close with this because we

you're gonna break my almost it's already 2:30

it's just a shame because like all the other claims he made before all right what other ones were false in the interview are in in the in the film like this when you said and I've seen you say this on interviews we have 22 years of research showing that a single high fat meal and pairs endothelial function that study was called it was from 1997 snow multiple studies and I can put them up if you want so that's 22 years

buddy from the fact of a single high fat meal on endothelial function in healthy subjects so this compared to nine hundred calorie diet both were on 900 calories one group hat was eating 50 grams of fat and one group was Zero grams of fat we need the high fat meal was an Egg McMuffin a sausage McMuffin I'm not talking about the two hash browns and non-caffeinated drink off from McDonald's yeah I'm not talking to you but that is just one so which one are you talking about I got a bunch okay well I got a bunch that

actually contradict that so that's the same study the same researcher that did that study found that taking vitamin c and e after the high fat meal completely eliminated the the effect that it had on endothelial function which suggests that a healthy omnivorous diet with plants wouldn't have the same impact there was a 2019 review and this is will be at Kresser dot Co / game changers adding nuts avocados olives berries spice Blends Orange

is red wine and protein including milk protein to a high fat meal prevents endothelial dysfunction and oxidative stress we've got several studies that suggest that Dairy and egg proteins improve endothelial function 2015 controlled trial with 52 subjects dietary proteins including milk and egg improved endothelial function 2006 study adding dietary protein to a high fat meal prevented postprandial endothelial dysfunction

we have 2009 study followed subjects for 12 weeks a low-carb diet improved endothelial function whereas a low-fat diet decreased it 2007 study with follows we just lose all of these studies show that animal proteins don't crease and endothelial function have to know more about nutrition and its really projects that please respond attack

to ponder okay so first of all you just compared to low carbon high carb I am not a I'm not for health I'm not promoting high carb all that wasn't the point the point is it low carb diets that contain animal products and that milk and egg protein has been shown the endothelial function not worsen it right so we're comparing the film was the animal protein worsens endothelial because that is the scientific consensus and we keep going back to will tell us why tell us what that is I mean we're seeing these Seafood consumption protects against endothelial damage

damage Seafood is an animal protein Mediterranean diet which includes animal products improves pulse wave velocity blood flow markers of atherosclerosis these are studies in the peer-reviewed literature yeah but we're lucky for them so what's wrong with okay so the industry-funded studies what you do is wait wait who said anything about these being industry-funded no but what you do see is compare everything is healthy compared to what healthy or unhealthy compared to what so if you have a low carb diet and you replace the bunch of white sugar

flower you might not see your it's going to be the outcome is going to be a decrease the claim that was made in the film is that animal product animal proteins worsen endothelial function I just listed a whole bunch of studies especially those suggesting here's one that says influence of food patterns on endothelial biomarkers or systemic systematic review the conclusion was that healthy food patterns abundant in fruits and vegetables had a beneficial impact on endothelial function westernized patterns

higher intakes of processed Meats sweets fried foods refined grains were positively Associated inflammation makes my point in another know it makes my point which is quality matters yeah so it's my muffin and Egg McMuffins and you show them not showing that my studies are not we're going okay but let's let him explain his studies just so for example slide 71 I I purposely didn't include those study because I don't think that they're a good thing to compare to so slide 71

okay there's no this is nice because there's a graph right so you can see how everyone's saying like that fat in the blood that's normal well what do you mean by normal yeah lots of people do that that's normal that doesn't mean it's optimal when you see the fat in the blood that and by the way it was a film we couldn't throw everything in so when you see fat that's called postprandial IP know that means after a meal fat in the blood right that is associated with up to 50 percent decreased endothelial function which means Nest nitric oxide is produced which means that the arteries can't open up as much less oxygen less nutrients to the muscles okay

so that is a such as you can see in this graph I don't know so the solid line is the tried another solid line is how much your arteries are dieting flow media did vasodilation right so as the triglycerides this is after the meal okay which was by the way a shake of whipping cream and liquid chocolate and nonfat dry milk okay as the as your meal you can see that the triglycerides Europe that's the fat in your blood see between two and four hours it kind of peaked

we measure those athletes at two hours and again this is not just a film it's been done for over 20 years in the scientific literature so as you can see in the graph right Joe as the dotted line goes up that's the appearance of more fat in the blood right you get that lacked Essence the milking of the blood you can see that very clearly that the flow meter dilation drops it drops by 11% okay if you look for example do that make sense so that when you have those fat in the blood your ability to your arteries to expand goes down there

like what does that's not an Egg McMuffin that is milk and whipping cream and that's it so now if you go to slide 73

now I agree this had some so they can put another here yeah we can skip the next one I was 11 percent okay so here what I've done is the only thing I'd change about this graph is I put the green dots for the plant-based material and the red dots we analyze meal so they were eating Korean barbecue egg milk oil mayonnaise rice and vegetables and on the other hand they were having a vegan meal of soup kimchi vegetables orange juice apple so it's match for calories at 800 calories the green is in red and the so the green is plant and the red is animal-based

so I don't know if you want to go into the basically you fight something for

but again please try to remember a lot of people listening I'm sorry did you want to read the me can if you want but here changes of serum triglycerides were negatively correlated with changes of fmd for me to flow mediated dilation there's no doubt well low-carb diets often will lower serum triglycerides and they can do not post pregnant not post not postpone do Li not after the meal for that which is important to test because that lasts for 6 to 8 hours and what do you do again you eat another animal based meal so the

pottinger the stop go ahead then how is it that triglycerides go down over time if such a bot is because your body adapts to it so Joe can you read the second book The study suggests that acute HTG hypertriglyceridemia that's that's the fat in the blood which causes endothelial dysfunction via enhanced oxidant stress and that and this may pave the way for the development of our Arthur Osaka Rose versus on a mouthful

that's real sclerosis under cronic so what that saying like in this kind of condition it means short term and chronic long-term is under cute thing affects your endothelial function your ability to exercise and perform and in the long term effects chronic diseases like heart disease and if you go to slide 75 remember that chart that we looked at with the green dots and the red dots 8.2 percent decrease in fmd two hours following the animal-based meal 2.7 percent increase in fmd two hours following the plant-based meal okay so you got less blood flow so

Chris makes out there's no science no evidence it was just this crazy thing that they made up it was the co-chair of the cardiovascular committee for the NFL that has been researching this for years I didn't say that James I said there was a lot of other evidence contradicting it so right but you're truly want to bring up study you can put backs of dietary carbohydrate restriction versus low fat diet on Flow mediated dilation this is what you've been talking about because you're not wearing it at three

hours increased from five point one percent the 64.5% in the carbohydrate restricted group and decreased from 7.9% 25.2% in the low-fat diet right 12-week low-carbohydrate diet improves postprandial vascular function more than a low-fat diet right because the low fat diet has a bunch of like white flour and stuff in it that's the thing but that's where there's are far from the low carb diets due to their diets with animal

talking about protein the claim in the film was that animal protein causes endothelial dysfunction somehow we've gotten off talking about fat and I've just I'm not all you just mentioned many studies that show that that dietary proteins including milk and egg improve endothelial function know they don't fish okay they don't be standing right here nobody so what are these your pants you can't just say a study right because Chris can bring your dietary proteins improve endothelial function

under fasting conditions but not in the postprandial state with no effects on markers of low-grade inflammation which is in the Journal of nutrition 2015 study okay but dietary proteins doesn't even necessarily mean animal-based proteins right know it says including milk and egg including yeah Chuck or not this is the bottom line is that he can present any study I'd have to dig into it through the funding what it because it's always what's compared to so you can show a huge benefit for eggs if you compare it to lat right you can there's also

worth proteins that included soy soy milk and egg and they all improved endothelial function yeah and then another dietary protein milk or soy to a high fat meal prevented postprandial endothelial dysfunction and then there are the two low carb studies that I mentioned there's controlled trial that found the low-carb high-fat diet improve pulse wave velocity which is another marker of endothelial function their studies

he's of the Mediterranean diet which is a healthy diet pattern that includes some animal products include improved pulse wave velocity Seafood consumption protects against endothelial damage yes compared to compared to beef it does

review that's the guy just said like for example you said you were trying to refute the study about the increase risk of cancer colon cancer between a vegetarians and non-vegetarians right the three times increased risk with those who had white meat fish or chicken once or twice a week and then you go to a meta-analysis which is not comparing you're comparing fish to bacon or beef of course continue comparing any that these are controlled trials that look at dietary proteins

he'll crack an egg but Chris first of all you have knitted that you don't even know how to read the science is that fair do you honestly feel qualified to read even a single Paper yes but you don't know how to read a photo taken research I took a master's level research methodology class so maybe those are you deserve I'm referring to studies that are in the peer-reviewed literature contents like and you haven't answered the question like how if if protein impairs endothelial function y our

he's showing that milk and egg don't do that George improve George still one study showing that like the heart rate went up when he did like a knockout without touching someone just because you can show studies that I can't like I haven't had a chance to read and dig into doesn't need me to my point it's just like the film has been reviewed and has been accredited by the defense health agency but we've heard that right so you think that they like

find your basically your your your debunk which you failed miserably to debunk the film right I have proven again and again the your points were invalid I have presented data with healthier meals you try thought I was going to go to the feeding someone McDonald's I didn't I showed one with just basically Dairy just Dairy increasing and I have shared three or four studies like Dairy proteins and I am talking about and I'm not interfere with endothelial function actually improve it the bottom bottom line is show right

but at each step of the way

Chris is not in line with scientific consensus okay not on protein recommendations not a definition of carbohydrates not on endothelial function not on heme iron he's just not it's like you shouldn't be having him on

to say he's and he said himself he's not an expert in nutrition he is unable to read us that unable to read a single study and understand it

I am not qualified either that's a mischaracterization okay then tell me tell me the confidence interval of of this in the first place listen I'm presenting I've never seen anyone can say anything about I've not put myself out like I'm the expert that is but that's like people doing these studies is doing these studies about same way that you did you collected information from the time to their senses which I'm leaving

characters with thousands of years 500 there is not was okay go ahead there's there are many experts that would disagree yeah but a same thing is like a orange or whatever Saint no it's not the same at all yeah it's absolutely not the same that there's the the consensus of experts that agree that we should be on a hundred percent or even 95% plant-based diet is the same as the consensus on climate change not even close to that how low

oh is that the scientific consensus says that we should being predominantly plant-based diets and that vegan and vegetarian vegan diets are appropriate helpful for All State of life cycle I've shown that you can get enough protein I've shown that the quality DS scoring doesn't matter I've shown that the B12 stuff that you got is completely wrong like what else you want me to show you you're going to show you that like even despite having lower creatine levels because people have pointed out in the film although you said as long as you get all the amino acids that's enough you didn't point out that the study said

they didn't all be vegetarians have lower creatine stores therefore it may affect performance they didn't test it I've got a bunch of studies where it has been tested where they had vegetarians and meat eaters had equivocal fat free Mass equivalent power output equation equivalent time to fatigue despite lower creating levels and we know that creatine is ergogenic I've also got other studies showing that when vegetarians actually takes supplemental creatine they get increased gains of over 1 pound of muscle over the meat eaters so despite lower creatine which we know the most studied supplement

and they're getting that because their intake of creatine is lower yes and so and so when they say they're supplementing they see a bigger response you could look at that the other way you could say we should have more creatine in their diet and they then they wouldn't need to supplement with that to get the bigger response right but I'm points out that despite lower creating tools which we know our go genic which are performance-enhancing they still have equivocal fat free mass muscle and power output and time to fatigue and when you add

then you get a benefit now I'm not saying that everyone should be taking creatine but if you're trying to build as much muscle as possible I think you should and by the way meat-eaters also tend to supplement that trying to body build with creatine as well so I'm saying that despite the fact of lower creatine which we know is the would you argue that's like the probably the most well studied and best supplement that we know of that can help my master Gene yeah okay fair enough so despite little creatine people on plant-based diets can

we'll have as much muscle mass and when they hit creatine they get even more than the meat eaters and I've got bunch of science to prove that too so basically Joe if someone watched the last episode where he tried to debunk the film for two hours and 50 minutes do you feel that I've fairly addressed a lot of the critiques and I've got to dress a lot more he talks about nutrient quality he likes to refer to like Diet quality says that we're lowering were lower in certain nutrients yeah vegans are low typically in B12 and D calcium and zinc because there's a bunch of shit but meat

is allowing about nine so he likes to point to a nutrient score which favors right that's not comparing equivalent vegans vegans and vegetarians in general are do you know they smoke less they have a higher drink last have a hundred diet quality and job because I just doesn't do all the Herring apples to write because I do all of the things that are better for health including eating a plant-based diet because he thinks that just the only one thing that they don't do better is it the more plants well he's saying that

you lump in meat eaters with people that eat the standard American diet when you say meat eaters are not talking about people who are eating organic American get sixty percent of their calories from Ultra processed and refined them but no don't act like that's why their nutrient but that's what they are saying just said that media you're not comparing like Joe Rogan's and his diet versus an equivalent know that I'm pointing it out is that you are saying that vegans are typically more deficient in certain nutrients they are in certain nutrients but that's because a lot of people

smile and don't like and see you looking at the overall group of them versus the people that are doing it as recommended by these studies that are showing the appropriate amount of amino acids they're doing it just because they're balancing it out and if I ever I adore you don't cladding it I didn't think about I don't count and how much protein I'm taking I just eat a wide variety and if I really good source actually is nutritionfacts.org and he's got this useful thing called yeah he doesn't like that because it's not in alignment what's wrong with nutritionfacts.org

it's just a it has a very strong plant-based agenda yeah because they well because they follow the science so anyway forget all of them useful videos are on there they do like three minute videos for people to learn about the science gives all the references but the useful thing the really useful thing is he has like the daily dozen you know about what all of the evidence has shown we should be eating when you're eating meat or not all of the evidence showing like how much legumes how much fruit so much vegetables you know reflects Eden these types of things so

it's just like it's like a fridge magnet you can throw in your fridge and James you made an excellent point Chris do you have anything to say in closing no thank you for enduring I really appreciate time so I haven't felt a bit combative know you knocked it out the park did a fantastic job so I think I mean it makes me consider well let me explain my position coming in here I felt like you'd put your film out I felt Chris felt the same way having you in here while he debunked it would just going to be a waste of time you would put your position out he was going to chance

but I've also felt that would be unfair to not have you come in and explain and refute his debunking and I think you did a fantastic job I really appreciate that my own pleasure and love to come back on talk about out of and looks awesome never met let's do that next time awesome okay thank you Chris thank you James bye everybody

well

that was intense right that was a long-ass podcast Jaime homes that podcast

three hours and 42 minutes and it was a very impressive performance by James walks very impressed this episode the podcast is brought to you by the motherfucking cash app yes it was and cash app investing when you download the cash app from the app store or the Google Play Store use the promo code Joe Rogan all one word you will receive ten dollars in the cash app will send ten dollars

Justin wrens fight for the Forgotten charity building Wells for the pygmies and the Congo and if you didn't hear exact bitter is going to run across the motherfucking country for fight for the Forgotten like what he's got to run across the country it's going to be 40 days of Hit and Run he's got to run across the country hear me Jamie what kind of craziness is that like I was a Savage we're also brought to you by CB D MD you can get 20% off your

our next order when you use the promo code Rogan at checkout solids for any of CBD MDS premium CBD oil products so CB D MD.com use the promo code Rogan for 20% off your purchase of high-quality CBD oil products from CBD MD and then there's our slogan don't worry about it Jamie don't worry about it and we're also brought to you by Brave the web browser

and keeping your personal information private as you surf the web the web switching to Brave is very easy you can import your bookmarks with just one click and in less than 60 seconds you will be enjoying a better internet it's free and all your Chrome extensions will work in Brave listeners the podcasts which to Brave today at Brave.com Rogan and switch now

you should try it Brave.com Rogan Brave yesterday was about big Tech today is about us Jamie we did it all right thank you everyone for tuning into the show appreciate you much love and bye-bye