Botched anatomy Posted on March 3, 2023 by Anonymous which animals have weird or stupid anatomy? picrel
humans having only one hole for both breathing and eating, it's bullshit that you can literally die from choking on food while literally doing the one thing you need to survive
wrong, its that the larynx developed into talking rather than doing what its suppose to do, keeping shit out of the breathing bags
>literally shits into it's own mantle cavity that also contains the gills and olfactory organs (osphradium)
imagine the smell
That is the exit pipe.
>which animals have weird or stupid anatomy?
This court ruling was later overruled and now circumcision by poorly trained nonprofessionals is legal in Germany (due to heavy muslim and gnomish intervention).
A few people lost their dicks due to that.
>A few people lost their dicks due to that.
Nothing new on Shekelbergs plantation.
snails are so fucked up biologically. like they were cobbled together in a hurry
The greatest designer
Human children's immune systems are trained on bacteria it comes into contact with while growing up, children that live in sterile environments have weaker immune systems in adulthood.
We were never designed to live the way we do, bacteria are an important part of our biological systems.
Fuck off to sosach
literally everything about a horse is fucked up design
I'm still surprised any of them actually make it to adulthood when half their body is just begging to kill itself for random or no fucking reason what so ever
There is a drainage system that is above a point of gravity rather than below which causes our sinuses to be regularly cursed as bacterial homesteads and are frequently infected.
Other primate species don't have this because their face isn't scrunched up like ours. The drainage spots for our sinuses are a remnant of when humans had muzzles like any other beast. This is why your sinuses clear up when you tilt your head back, it's the only way they properly drain on their own.
>tfw your sinus infection gets so bad you start contemplating drilling holes in your face to release the pressure
I regulary massage my face at the sinus spots, it SEEMS to work since I haven't got any sinus infection since I have started doing this.
And hell, I had those every other week.
For a while I'd get at least one a year, and I'd never do anything about it because they usually take care of themselves. But I did have a really bad one that I finally went to the doctor for and he had barely stuck that little scope up my nose before he was like "jesus christ how horrifying." He gave me some painkillers, flonaise, and some antibiotics.
I remember the first toot of that nasal spray instantly reduced all the inflammation and the pressure and I nearly fell on my face because I got a hit of endorphins my body had been producing to deal with the pain without the pain made me loopy for a moment.
Ever since then I just pay attention for the early symptoms, then start taking a bunch of musinex, drinking water until its coming out of my ears, and flushing my nose with baking soda and salt water and I haven't had a problem since.
Just move to a dry climate area, worked for me
Yeah, it's almost like humans were genetically engineered from monkeys by an unearthly force.
>fucked up sinuses
>painful life threatening births
>the appendix does nothing, will randomly explode and kill you
>gall bladder is useless
>jaw too small for the wisdom teeth
None of these things kills a significant number of people before they breed. Fuck, your "natural" diet is likely to kill you around age 60 but naturally people rarely live past 50. Now that we're not exactly natural we carefully mind our diets and say "mamoth? no, too much bad fat, grug drag net through ocean to eat more fish".
This, the goal of life isn't producing the most comfortable creature possible, just alive enough to reproduce
Also, humans exceed at perpetuating genetic failures because of our advanced healthcare
>>jaw too small for the wisdom teeth
Pretty sure that that is mostly due to the modern diet being too soft and thus most human jaws don't grow like they should.
>Jaw too small for wisdom teeth
That's a result of eating nothing but basedmush and corn syrup, I'm a jawless chincel and I have enough room for 2 rows on top and 3 rows on bottom.
Pushing a finger onto my nose right between my eyes and pushing my tongue against the roof of my mouth somehow opens something up in my sinuses and I can feel mucus down my throat. It feels grimm but fucking works every time.
The fact we have a blind spot in our eye because our optic nerves are facing the wrong direction
Meanwhile stuff like cephalopods got it right
why does dying earlier matter again?
oh no, my heart won't make it to 116, i better never eat beef
people used to die at 40-50 for reasons unrelated to their diet.
imagine missing out on those last 40 years of being too crippled to live unassisted and slowly losing your intelligence until you're basically a really slow 7 year old with extra memories
After seeing what dementia does to a motherfucker, I am convinced that living to be incredibly old is not a blessing unless you can guarantee the wellbeing of your own mental health to go along with it.
The moment you realize you're losing your marbles, that's the time to pull the gun out of the sock drawer and take the short way out before you end up a vegetable.
Unironicaly just read more. The more you exercise your brain, the less likely it is to break.
>people used to die at 50
This meme needs to die. Average life spans were dragged down because of high infant mortality. If you lived past 4, you were roughly as likely to make it to 70 as you are today.
>This meme needs to die.
(You) need to die. this muh infant mortality is such a retarded meme that it is difficult to even imagine the scientific iliteracy one needs to perpetuate it. starting with the fact that we have no real idea of infant mortality back then (only estimates from accidental family histories), continuing with the fact that such a statistic would be meaningless (kinda like calculating the average miles run by american cars while including the ghetto cadillacs standing on bricks for years) and finishing woth the fact that no primary source is ever given where you could see the "life expectancy having reached adulthood" expression, it's just an NPC memeparrot's candy.
they poop while sideways so it wont fall on them
Yeah. Wauf have a surprisingly large number of people who seems to be completely ignorant about common animals we see anywhere. Makes me think basement dwellers meme is real, there are actual people who base most of their outside world knowledge on internet memes.
>Yeah. Wauf have a surprisingly large number of people who seems to be completely ignorant about common animals we see anywhere.
Eh, how many people are actually interested enough in slugs to follow one around just to see how it defecates? Especially if they're planning to make le funni soijak comic about slugs?
Were you never a kid? Pick some bugs and put them in a jar to observe them? I guess I’m just old and kids these days just play video games (and I did play a lot of video games in my childhood) but I would expect Wauf to have more people interested in animals and nature.
>Pick some bugs and put them in a jar to observe them?
No, I was that weird kid who ate a couple of ants to see how they tasted.
>anon ate ze bugs before the meme even existed
that's a funny way of saying smash
My front yard is infested with small snails, they like to gather at the balcony early morning
>Wow, you're a prey animal that survived this long without getting eaten? Time to impale your brain!
It actually makes sense. The dominant male already had offspring and no longer breeds, but his presence still prevents the younger pigs from breeding. So nature automatically culls him to allow another pig to take his place.
Same with women and breast cancer.
Pigs are communal animals that form family bonds. Surely it would make sense for the animal to stay alive longer and protect their offspring against competitors? That's the argument given for other animals living after loosing the ability to breed.
Fact is that evolution just doesn't care what happens after reproduction.
they need to keep fighting and ramming stuff with their tusks to keep them short and live, when they get too old for that their body just kill itself
Nature isn't an engineer. Nature simply selects for what will get a creature to reproduce and have the offspring survive. If the creature spends it's entire life in crippling agony with trigeminal neuralgia the moment the offspring is self sufficient, it's still a win since the next generation spawned and will reproduce.
It just works.
>the creature spends it's entire life in crippling agony with trigeminal neuralgia
That never happens in nature. All ungulates have ever growing hooves, horns and/or tusks that become a nuisance after they reach a certain size, but the animals know how to take care of them.
>That never happens in nature.
I assumed his example was hyperbole. A more grounded one would be octopus/insects dying of hunger/being eaten the moment they score
kinda like those evolutionary flash games
The human body also breaks down to the point that survival is impossible without assistance
that seems like the smartest place to put it, the snail can just move the head out of the way (or curl back inside to poop, which is what probably happens), he wouldn't be able to properly get rid of the poop from any other part of the opening in the shell
>Even Loquendo adds an "e" before the st- sound
and people wonder why "latinx" failed so hard
>The recurrent laryngeal nerve is an often cited example of “unintelligent design” in biology, especially in the giraffe. The nerve appears early in embryonic development, before the pharyngeal and aortic arches are separated by the development of the neck. The recurrent course of the nerve from the brain, around the great vessels, to the larynx, is shared by all extant tetrapods. Therefore we may infer that the recurrent laryngeal nerve was present in extinct tetrapods, had the same developmental origin, and followed the same course.
why is that unintelligent design?
its a 5m long nerve that loops around so it can control your larynx, for smaller animals its fine, the distance between the head and the chest isnt that long, but for a giraffe it a 5 meter lap for something that is 2 inches away
Does that result in some kind of negative effect or lag time for girrafs compared to short neck animals?
im a psychologist, so i dont exactly understand fully physical function of the brain and its limitations on nerves, but im gonna guess it increases the mortality rate in fighting giraffes because they hit each other in the neck, and if they hit the right side hard enough they could damage the nerve and kill them
The giraffe needs to smell it's food too
Whenever I remember this is a thing I get extremely queasy and distressed, fuck I hate it
but i figure if even dinosaurs have to deal with it its probably not a problem at all
We're all in this together. Trust the plan (God's plan)
Why? It's overthinking circulatory system stuff that gets me.
Eyes used to get me, but that video of the meth head pulling his own eye apart desensitized me. Sucked being ill for an hour from a webm though lol.
>but that video of the meth head pulling his own eye apart
Where would you put it?
not have the nerve make a u-turn, the nerve starts in the brain and its destination is the larynx, in case you didnt know, the actual distance between the two isnt very far. and the only reason why its this way is because that fish stupid decided to walk onto land
lol. lmao, even.
>uhm, erm, sum skygarden gnome said da erth wuz 6000 thousands of years becuz uhmmm IT JUST SEZ SO OK? STAHP QUESCHUNING MY INTELLIGE- I MEAN, STAHP QUESHCHENING DA HOLLY BUK!
Fun fact: there's another nerve on the other side that takes a shorter path.
All this bullshit is because all tetrapods descend from a fish with a repeating, symmetrical segmented body plan kind of like a bug. As mutations accumulated, some things got repurposed and shifted around. Gill arches became jaws and airway valves. The nerves supplying them moved in turn. The circulatory system changed and became asymmetrical. So, a nerve on one side just stretched because moving it to the other side would actually require significant genetic remodeling (generating it from a different body segment), while because of the asymmetry the other one took a less stupid path.
All of evolutionary history is like taking a propeller plane, and then making it a jet plane by modifying the air brakes while turning the original piston engine into a gun.
also, some elephants missing an important digestive enzyme when young and have to farm that enzyme from older elephants' shit.
A few animals do that
Iguanas do this too. Maybe it's just an herbivore thing in general.
do vegans eat each other shit as well?
No, because humans are already adapted to be primarily herbivorous, like every other primate.
It's literally the opposite. Humans adapted to be primarily carnivorous, specifically as scavengers. We now have all of the enzymes required to fully digest all bodily tissues and even smaller chunks of bone, our molars changed shape to be sharper with deeper cusps, and our guts shrank dramatically to adapt to the easier to digest, more nutrient dense diet while our stomach acid became stronger than that of some other scavengers to handle the parasitic and bacterial load that comes with how humans like their meat: sitting out for days at a time, stolen or hunted.
As a downside we lack the ability to digest tougher plant foods and have to pre-digest them.
If they wanted to, they'd do some roundabout shit with a routine of prebiotic/probiotic supplements to try and force their guts to handle cellulose better, or if they're wealthy, a series of fecal transplants. But they don't want to so they just eat an incredibly varied and voluminous diet to cope with how they can't actually digest plants that well.
The end result causes far more animal suffering and death than just keeping some chickens and rabbits in their backyards, or even just mealworms, but what matters is that they feel like they're being nice and can convince other people that they're moral, and still get to eat fatty, sugary, salty foods like frozen pizzas.
seething vegan obliterated by smarter, funnier anon with facts and logic
those are biological facts dude
the vulture tier stomach acid is actually a medically significant problem
>still get to eat fatty, sugary, salty foods like frozen pizzas.
People eat shit, it's not specific to vegans.
>uh, the general scientific consensus and decades of nutritional science is wrong actually, humans are actually carnivores, my favorite carnivore diet grifter on YouTube told me so
Anon, the general scientific consensus is that humans are actually carnivores. Our entire evolutionary history is blamed on eating meat.
Eating meat doesn't cause any problems for the entirety of the human lifespan in the wild. We can push past that by changing our diet and leveraging unnatural agriculture to pick and choose ideal foods, but...
The healthiest and longest lived people on earth eat diets rich in fungi, eggs, fish and white meat.
The objectively, scientifically proven healthiest diet you can possibly eat includes fish, eggs, and white meat.
Supplementation has inferior bioavailability.
Meat replacement requires an increase in volume and exotic products.
You can not feed a child a vegan diet without ill effects.
Humans, objectively, provably, evolved to eat meat, and are natural carnivores. Being a vegan is as objectively, probably retarded as eating a shitload of beef and dairy - and as morally stupid as well
>i care about duh suffering
Ok half your produce was produced with human slave labor. A man oppressed for a week suffers hundreds of times more than an entire feedlot full of cattle over the course of a year. And is the only one in this situation who is PROVEN to suffer and have self awareness, instead of nociception and automated social signaling to direct the herd away from danger (incorrectly called "screaming in terror").
>A man oppressed for a week suffers hundreds of times more than an entire feedlot full of cattle over the course of a year. And is the only one in this situation who is PROVEN to suffer and have self awareness, instead of nociception and automated social signaling to direct the herd away from danger (incorrectly called "screaming in terror").
the basis of veganism is actually hating humans and wanting them to starve and die out gracefully
>You can not feed a child a vegan diet without ill effects.
veganism is against reproduction
they're like the quakers, willing evolutionary failures. veganism reproduces like a disease, it infecgts and kills the hosts and can only spread by dooming more people.
The healthiest and longest lived people on earth are those who eat diets comprised mainly of plant matter as evidence shows time and time again from Okinawan islanders to Adventist vegetarians.
Humans are obviously omnivores with a strong lean towards herbivory. Ideally meat wouldn't make up more than 20% of the homo sapien diet. There's a reason it gives us cancer and atherosclerosis.
>There's a reason it gives us cancer
*processed* *red* meat does because the original human diet was heavy in fish and small game.
See above. You are talking about *processed* *red* meat. Also consider that even with a lot of red meat, these problems arise and only become a hinderance after the historical adult life expectancy.
>The healthiest and longest lived people on earth are those who eat diets comprised mainly of plant matter
And meat. You can finangle vegetarians in with averages versus a group that includes a lot of poor and uneducated people slamming dairy and processed red meat every single day but is that really a valid comparison? "People who walk live longer than motorcycle racers, therefore stop using wheels".
Due to modern medicine, we can adopt a relatively recent and unnatural diet for us to optimize our lifespan. If desired. One that includes plant matter that would be difficult or impossible to acquire year round, and more carefully selected species of fresh, never cured meat. These diets still include meat. We eat meat. Humans eat meat.
The only possible alternative to meat is a desperate attempt to reconstruct it from other materials and requires a globalized and industrialized land-leveling orangutan-slaughtering and brown person enslaving (or else costs would skyrocket) economy to even attempt, and said attempt, below the level of just growing meat in a vat (why? the animal is a vat, just cripple the brain so it doesn't move), still doesn't work except for adults that can afford to starve a little - but ideally, you eat meat, and your body functions at its best with it.
Do you not know what the word mainly means? As in mostly but not entirely? Why don't any of you disingenuous fucks ever allow for any nuance in thought?
Go ahead and hit with with the >MAH GENETICS line.
I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make.
Do you take her at her word when she says raw eggs are the reason she lived so long? Did you not consider that it's more likely that she simply attributes all good health to a single habit she's kept for her health, regardless of whether it's actually healthy or not? Are you dumb?
Meat eggs and diary can't be unhealthy if the world's oldest people eat them. That's the point, retard.
Yes, and Jeanne Calment smoked until she was 117.
Nutrition is a pseudo-science , eating meat or not won't change anything in your life expectancy.
If I had to eat british "food" for over a hundred years I'd probably chubbuck myself
>eating delicious things is a key to my longevity
>"this proves my carnivore humans point"
>picks the example that best aligns with them
>ignores the people eating raw eggs, bacon, cheese, milk, miso, etc..
Humans are omnivores and the genus homo has been evolving to be more and more carnivorous compared to their pre-homo ancestors. The oldest people alive tend to eat plenty of lean meats, fermented foods and vegetative matter. They're omnivorous. That being said, there have existed people who for most of the year if not for years at a time would be purely carnivorous and were mainly carnivorous to begin with -- that being the Inuit peoples.
A vegetarian diet misses out on key proteins only available from animals.
Spoilers: a balanced diet means exactly that.
When all death causes are taken into account and the data is adjusted by other factors like lifestyle, smoking, etc the mortality ratio is the lowest in fish eaters (0.82) followed by vegetarians (0.84) and occasional meat eaters (0.84) which is then followed by regular meat eaters (1.0) and vegan (1.0)
Key, Timothy J, et al., 1999 "Mortality in vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative analysis of 5 prospective studies" American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 70, No. 3, 516S-524S, September 1999
The thing is that people who adopt a vegetarian diet for health reasons also tend to adopt other healthy habits like exercise and stop smocking. These affect the mortality rates way more. My family is from Okinawa and no, they aren't vegetarians or vegans and probably the fact that they tend to be more chill and less stressed also helps in longevity. On a final note, sure eating way too much meat is not good but eating no meat at all is not good either. Like in everything moderation is key. Drinking too much water can be bad for you but that doesn't means that avoiding drinking water entirely would be good for you.
Based. I only cook and eat meat on weekends, but the meat I eat is already free-range/grass-fed.
I don't get why people are so reluctant to accept that an unhealthy animal produces unhealthy meat, eggs ect.
which of those two is the healthy one? I'm guessing the one on the left, but free range eggs always seem darker to me so maybe right?
Pale yolks come from corn/grain-fed chickens.
Neither of these posts answered my question. Unsub me from chicken facts pls
Egg color depends on the type of carotene in the chicken diet and can be easily altered with artificial additives in. The feed from white to red.
Dark yolks aren't always healthy (can cheat with pigments), but pale yolks are always unhealthy.
It's difficult to make any concrete conclusions from that study because the sample size of vegans is so small (31,766 meat eaters, 8135 occasional meat-eaters, 2375 fish-eaters, 23,265 vegetarians, 753 vegans). It's also a bit old (1999).
It's perfectly possible to be healthy on a vegan diet per the Adventist Health Study 2 which found lower rates of all-cause mortality compared to non-vegetarians
>The adjusted HR for all-cause mortality in vegans was 0.85, lacto-ovo–vegetarians, 0.91, pesco-vegetarians, 0.81, semi-vegetarians, 0.92
Bearing in mind these are health conscious populations, so this is an example of people on actually healthy vegan diets. I mention it because the Epic-Oxford study for instance that looked at UK vegans, and for vegans they consumed fairly paltry amounts of fibre (28.9g a day) which is very low for someone eating only plants, suggesting their diets were likely poor. I only consider myself moderately health-conscious and can easily put away well over 50g per day eating whole grains, legumes, fruit & veg etc.
And here's a review that came out just last year of loads of studies, that found
>vegans have lower all-cause mortality (0.87), cancer incidence (0.84), and diabetes prevalence (0.79).
Though it found higher incidence of fractures in vegans (1.46). Although shouldn't necessarily be outright associated with general bone health:
>Of note, the fractures found were not the ones traditionally associated with osteoporosis. There were only a few cases of vertebral fractures, the major osteoporotic fractures, that limit the interpretation of this outcome
It's possible that BMI (more fat = more protection during falls) or frequency of exercise (increased likelihood of injury) wasn't controlled for perfectly. More studies are coming out all the time so will likely be more clarification regarding that in future.
Mortality at what cost
This is pretty unfounded, firstly it's not based on any kind of study, or clinical trial or anything it's just based on one person's opinion piece (a person who, it just so happens is up to her neck in industry ties) and was rebuked by at least one dietician with expertise in the field.
>However, despite Derbyshire's concerns, other nutritionists and dietary experts are less worried about a potential choline crisis. Professor Tom Sanders of King’s College London rejected Derbyshire’s claims about choline, which, as well as being present in meat, is also found in nuts, beans, mushroom and cruciferous vegetables such as broccoli. “There is no justification for suggesting that a plant-based diet risks damaging brain development. My own research on vegans and those of others in Europe and the US finds that the growth and development of vegans and vegetarians is normal. "Choline can be made in the body and it is also abundant in many plant foods including basedbeans."
Here's a site that has some information about the nutrient and also concludes that vegan sources are adequate, assuming a mindful diet.
Here's a video that goes deeper into the subject, it's a vegan-advocate channel, mind you, but seems to back everything up with sources and goes through the original editorial.
Of course we won't really know unless there's an actual clinical trial looking into choline levels in vegans. And bear in mind to actually be considered "deficient" is less than 50mg a day, which is practically impossible.
>half the vegans in a british sample were b12/choline deficient
IDEALLY you would eat a shitload kf specific crops to cope with the bioavailability issue. but you see humans evolved to eat lower automatons almost daily, and plants only grow for some of the year, and in some climates.
Just eat the fucking fish. Eat an egg. God knows its better than your mexican crops produced with slave labor. An oppressed man provably suffers. An animal does not. International trade has necessary carbon emissions. A chicken hutch in your backyard has barely any.
bro just only eat local and preserve a massive amount of very specific greenhouse grown veggies for winter
sure that might be insanely expensive and make you a local resource hog, driving other people to less savory food sources, but, vegan!
>half the vegans in a british sample were b12/choline deficient
Not seeing where choline is mentioned in those links. It's common knowledge B12 should be supplemented (as it is in most meat, inb4 muh nature) it doesn't surprise me that vegans would be lacking in choline because apparently 90% of the population is (if you watched the video you would see how the recommendations are not well studied and are likely overshooting). Though, again I'm not seeing where it said it, if they are deficient in choline I'm assuming it's not a medical deficiency (<50mg) and rather just failing to meet the 400-500mg targets, which, again, most people apparently are, but to no apparent dramatic health issues otherwise there'd be an epidemic. Regardless vegans should do well to be mindful of it if not supplementing but again it IS quite achievable through a well-planned diet.
Also you're talking to a capitalist enjoyer so the abloo abloo poor Mexicans thing does nothing for me. Industry pulls people out of poverty, line goes up world do gooder and all that.
That article is pretty awful, it uses that absurd study that compares meat and milk-based soup to oil-based soup where the prior two resulted it more aptitude, as if oil is a staple plant based food and a fair comparison. Then it goes on to make absurd and wrong claims such as creatine being an essential nutrient, wouldn't be surprised if they're shilling supplements. And looking at the bottom should be more than enough to discard this article:
>An earlier version of this article stated omega-3 generally only occurs in animal products. The article has been corrected to make clear there are three types of omega-3 fatty acids and that one of these, ALA, is found mainly in plants.
How do you make a mistake like this? Because the person writing the article hasn't a clue about nutrition. They're just a random journalist who got shunted into the B-list equivalent of BBC journalism.
Funnier still is this
>The article also stated that Nathan Cofnas was a biologist at the University of Oxford. He is in fact studying philosophy of biology at the University of Oxford and has co-authored studies looking at the impact of the vegan diet on health and the brain. The article has been corrected to reflect that.
They thought they were referencing an actual biologist and it turns out he was a PHILOSOPHY STUDENT, not even qualified. Lol, lmao even.
I don't find much else in the article very illuminating, it's mostly just ominous warnings but no concrete revelations that completely invalidate the vegan diet in the face of the more abundant evidence in support.
Anyway I don't find nutrition quite interesting enough to go back and forth on every micornutrient that vegans may or may not be missing. So I'll just leave it at the fact that presently the majority of mainstream nutritional bodies say a well-planned vegan diet can be perfectly healthy and barring any future concrete revelations that's good enough for me.
Bla bla bla bla nit picking red herrings but they also said this and that's dumb etc not the central point
Half of vegans are deficient in B12 and choline and suffer reduced neurological health for it
A "well planned" vegan diet is necessarily dependent on international trade and slave labor. healthy or not, it's not moral, and eating select animal products in smaller quantities is more healthy anyways. You can try and make it moral with a ridiculous effort that is not sustainable, it requires an insane amount of space just to feed one person like that.
Every single human being is proven to suffer.
0 animals are proven to suffer.
Animal products recycle inedible waste and reduce your environmental impact.
Animals can be farmed more sustainably than "the industry at large", ie: fed kitchen waste.
If you are vegan, you are associating yourself with a movement based on harm reduction, you are morally and logically obligated to eat animal products that do not cause harm, so fish/bugs that have roomba level cognition just to be safe, and eggs (it's like eating a turd, really). and on the selfish front, there is no actual logical reason to abstain from all animal products as fish and eggs are not correlated with reduced lifespans or any ill effects whatsoever.
Ah, I found the 50% of vegans are deficient in B12 study and it's actually based on the Epic-Oxford study, which I happened to mention earlier as the population of vegans who were less than health centric and not really indicative of healthy vegans. Don't see anything about choline though. Also Epic-Oxford was in the 90s though to I think 2004, which was pretty much the dark-ages of vegan nutrition, and likely predated b12 in dairy alternatives etc.. And that other study was just 100 vegetarians in bumfuck Pakistan. If a vegan in this day in age is B12 deficient they only have themselves to blame.
Also it seems there are a loads of deboonks of that shitty article, here's one I found by an apparent qualified dietician:
>is not sustainable, it requires an insane amount of space just to feed one person like that.
Certainly not even going to bother getting into food efficiency and land use because it seems you're quite insane. Practically every study finds entirely or at least predominantly plant-based diets are most efficient ways of feeding the ever-growing population.
And all modern diets are dependent on international trade, the entire modern world is, this fantasy you have of everyone being fed with chickens in their garden or whatever is exactly that. Unless we start throwing nukes and the population is reset I'm afraid there's even less chance of seeing your ideal world than there is mine.
Not to mention the the animal agriculture industry is horrific to humans as well, I'm pretty sure they have incredibly high rates of PTSD, utilize loads of unrepaid labour, imported immigrants etc. and I think it was just the other week in the US there was a scandal about child labour used in factory farms.
Also I think your views on fish cognition might be outdated.
Anyway good talk.
>Practically every study finds entirely or at least predominantly plant-based diets are most efficient ways of feeding the ever-growing population.
Compared to the animal agriculture industry as it is. Which is not an argument in favor of not eating animals - it's an argument in favor of reforming meat. We can use meat to increase efficiency. Capitalism doesn't want to. It would make it expensive, consumer demand would overshoot supply.
>All modern diets are dependent on international trade
Something we can change, using animals especially, but capitalism doesn't want to.
>Also I think your views on fish cognition might be outdated.
They are more or less roomba tier. And I will always hold this to be true: Only man can suffer. Without language you are not self aware and suffering is self awareness of pain.
>Only man can suffer
OK so you are vain
>And I will always hold this to be true: Only man can suffer.
Are you making a semantical distinction between pain and suffering or are you really believing that animals are not suffering?
This study have the same issue many others have. It doesn’t adjust for other lifestyles. The other study adjusted for smoking, exercise, etc while this one acknowledge the differences but only adjust for bmi. Also being overweight makes your bones stronger, it is one of the few advantages of being overweight. I heard that in medical school a long time ago but never bothered to check so there is a chance the professor was full of shit. I’m being a tertiary source on this last thing.
>Here is a study on how vegan and vegetarian diets were healthy before we processed onions into 20 different toxic carcinogens
So what happens then, the other 18% live forever?
Wow you cherry picked a couple of people I'm impressed
Look at all those thriving vegan society's
You know stress is the main limiter on lifespan right? Just because you're vegan doesn't counteract all the stress of living in a city.
What do you think about being a vegetarian living in the countryside?
Considering how little I eat for enjoyment, I'd probably enjoy a Saint Anthony-esqe life
That diet still includes 10 to 20% of animal products but whatever your vegan self needs to cope with the fact that you are suplementing everyday anon.
>Hello everyone, it's me, Lady Veganism!
>just gonna imply you're all stupid and against a "scientific consensus" and not put forward any counter arguments to the points given
The general scientific consensus is that humans are omnivores. Our guts aren’t as long as herbivores and we lack the microbes to digest plants properly. We have human populations who lived mostly on meat and mostly on plants before industrialization. But I doubt any human population could survive 100% on plants alone before agriculture started producing large amounts of nutrient rich plants.
btw. you are not less pathetic than the muh humans herbivore schizos. Humans are the most boring, inoffensive generalist omnivores imaginable. We are most comparable to pigs.
malnourished brain from vegan diet
>he doesn't know that apes will literally eat their own shit or the shit of other apes at times if it wasn't properly digested(which is what a lot of herbivores do)
If you don't believe me then go look up chimps eating shit.
jamie pull up the clip of the chimp eating the monkey crotch first
Why would nature have their intestines begin sterile? I don't understand the advantage of that.
Humans do a similar thing when baptized in the mother's juices during birth and through breast milk. C section babies have unique health challenges because of this.
I never got why people doing just smear the mother's vagina slime on C-sections babies.
What, you're going to let your kid have a weak immune system it's entire life because that sounds weird to you?
>What, you're going to let your kid have a weak immune system it's entire life because that sounds weird to you?
Well, that's obviously what's happening.
>I never got why people don't just smear the mother's vagina slime on C-sections babies
they do. probably not everywhere but yeah, this does happens.
born through C section here
Im all fucked with severe eczema, seasonal allergies, occasional alopecia, mild asthma, and now keratoconus. No digestive problems though
two sisters born normally, neither have my problems
I doubt thats all related to the c section
The whole being was formed from a single cell inside a sealed bag protected by a membrane to block microbes so they won't kill the fetus. Even the mothers blood doesn't come in direct contact with the fetus, the nutrients are transported through a barrier.
humans do it too, at least accidentally.
during birth mothers typically also shit out, and that helps give the baby a healthy gut flora.
people born with caesarean birth tend to have more intestinal problems than those born the natural way
This is why fecal transplant is a real medical thing, and it’s exactly what it sounds like.
>during birth mothers typically also shit out
Only when there is something left to shit out. And the baby is generally not in contact with the faeces.
>people born with caesarean birth tend to have more intestinal problems than those born the natural way
Interesting, could it be linked to the vaginal flora instead?
>And the baby is generally not in contact with the faeces.
Bro you have never seen a live birth. You're bearing down with all your strength to pass a watermelon through something the size of a lime that's sitting right on top of your intestines. When you're squeezing out any crap left in your guts.
Its a bloody messy process with shit and blood and piss everywhere on top of people screaming.
Only in the US. In my country women usually have their guts cleaned before birth, that's how it was with every woman in my family
Even with food left in the gut, this does not always mean poop everywhere, depends how the baby descends.
Also, one of the symptoms labor is imminent is a loss of appetite and diarrhea...If anything the body tries to clear itself out.
t. has been through the process twice
>Interesting, could it be linked to the vaginal flora instead?
Yes. I don't know where this weirdo got the idea about it being shit came from. Probably a fetishist like another anon said.
Just like other animals, human babies would instinctively seek out their mother's faeces at a young age and it wouldn't just be accidental. Human babies and toddlers show no sign of this behavior, instead seeking to breastfeed and/or mouth feed. This is because humans are now utterly omnivorous and do not need complex digestive processes in order to break down plant material when they can get it from easily digested animal material. That and cooking has forever altered our physiology as well.
There's enough people into shitplay nowadays, we don't need more trying to justify their mental illness with biological processes.
Drop the stupid useless 'a,' bong. For being the creators of English, you guys use it incorrectly a lot
>random silent As everywhere
that sounds like bullshit but I was born out of a C-section and I have IBP
I thought this was some kind of joke, after reading the replies now I'm sickened but curious about it.
Having been a participant in 2 births, I can assure you that if poop happens, it doesn't typically get on baby, and especially wont get into baby's digestive system
The real connection is probably that c-section moms have much lower rates of breastfeeding.
Also no, human babies do not 'instinctively seek out mother's faeces'. They can barely wiggle around after they are born, there is absolutely no way a human infant could access mom's poop unless it was specifically put in their mouths by an adult...which no one ever does and it was never normal to do, or necessary at all.
maybe there is something to fecal transplant after all
Do elephants have a different anus than humans? I don't understand how he was able to shove his trunk so deep effortlessly.
Most things with 4 legs don't need tight buttholes
This makes no sense though, how would the baby elephants know to do that? Unless shit eaters lived and all the non shit eaters didn't.
>Unless shit eaters lived and all the non shit eaters didn't.
Doesn't have to be as Boolean as that, anon. Those who did just needed to be more fit than those who didn't. Being able to better digest your food would of course give you an advantage.
Some elephants like poo and some don't. Some elephants lack the enzyme and some don't.
In the set of elephants that lack the enzyme, the ones who are presidposed to like the flavour of elephant poo tend to survive better than those that don't. To the degree that it's heritable, poo eaters beget poo eaters.
Ta-da, poo eating elephants often correct for enzyme deficiency.