Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
1
why not eat potato and cooked eggs?  certainly it would better than sourdough bread, and i would even recommend  cooked egg and potato over avocado and olive oil as the former is much less processed and might be easier to digest for you.  peel and cook the potatoes, let them cool, add some dandelion greens and some seaweed and gently cook the egg whites, leaving the yolk to drizzle in at the end.

Hi Jessica, thanks for your contribution. You've probably read this thread and what Im trying to achieve, but ill just summarize quickly in case you haven't:

One or more of my organs located in my midsection and likely related to digestion is under functioning and causing me incredibly pain which becomes exasperated after eating. Having studied the digestive process, I believe it must be ether my stomach, liver, gallbladder or pancreas.
To address this problem, I need to -    a) stop this organ(s) from causing me pain with the appropriate diet, and
                                                                   b) heal this organ(s) with the appropriate diet.

Ive deduced that eating raw meat will heal the organ(s), but Ive also deduced that eating the corresponding organ(s) of a healthy animal will provide healing far quicker and more effectively.

Now, you ask "why not eat potato and cooked eggs?" which is a good question. Im still working on (a) which is reducing the pain. Most foods cause pain and cooked foods more so than others. Fruit and juice is probably the only thing that doesn't. Eating potato and cooked eggs cause me pain - more pain than avocado and olive oil - but it certainly is not as satiating.

2
why not eat potato and cooked eggs?  certainly it would better than sourdough bread, and i would even recommend  cooked egg and potato over avocado and olive oil as the former is much less processed and might be easier to digest for you.  peel and cook the potatoes, let them cool, add some dandelion greens and some seaweed and gently cook the egg whites, leaving the yolk to drizzle in at the end.
3
You have no idea what you're saying, and don't even deserve a reply. Please educate yourself on these topics before making such blatantly ridiculous statements.
The pot calling the kettle black......
4
Off Topic / Re: Do not buy food raised by slaves- it is always nutrient-poor!
« Last post by dariorpl on Yesterday at 07:43:54 PM »
You have no idea what you're saying, and don't even deserve a reply. Please educate yourself on these topics before making such blatantly ridiculous statements.
5
Do you guys eat much fruit or starch? If not, was it hard to ween off carbs?
6
If is through the State that they exert power, it is the State system where the power lies. For everybody else, it is considered a crime if they steal, murder, rape and torture. But for State agents, it is considered not only acceptable, but a social good (or necessary evil). The State is the only agency that people at large will accept this from. They won't accept it directly from the companies. Hence the power lies with the State, not the companies that happen to control it temporarily. And as I explained, many countries in the past and present have had very large, powerful and destructive States with not a single large company in sight, and while these companies were made illegal just like you propose. The problem is not the companies. The problem is the delusion that gets the masses to accept oppression if it's coming from someone in an official uniform. Your proposal makes these people in funny costumes a lot more powerful. Your proposal is nothing but rebranded socialism. And I'm not even sure about the rebranded part.
Utter nonsense, of course. I already pointed out that politicians in democratic states  are owned by the big companies. The reason is simple:- as long as they kowtow to the companies, they can get future company directorships etc. once they leave politics.This practice has to be implemented in a democratic society as politicians cannot spend their whole lives in power unlike in other political systems. In short, democratic politicians have no power, much like the queen of england, it is merely symbolic and therefore meaningless. And I note that most UKers feel no real loyalty to the queen(or  to current  UK politicians)precisely because she(and they) has/have  no power. People kowtow only to those with real power. And please do not go on making baseless accusations of socialism, it is clear that it is a meaningless word that you use just to describe anything that does not conform to your beliefs, nothing more.
Quote
Capitalism simply means economic freedom for everyone in an area. Socialism means economic slavery for everyone or most in that area. There is only one axis along which this can be measured. You're either for freedom, or you're a socialist. Sure there are points along the middle of the line, like fascism. Libertarianism and capitalism in this sense are one and the same. Your ideology, by your own explanations and suggestions, is much closer to socialism than even to fascism.
Wrong again, or as politically-correct teachers in the US now have to say, you are "nearly right!". LIbertarianism and capitalism are mutually exclusive concepts, with capitalism not involving much in the way of freedom.And you still have not remotely understood what my ideology actually is.


Quote
Socialism is the only ideology which can claim that they want to reduce someone's productivity as a goal in and of itself. When someone is more productive in a civilized society based on trade, everybody in that society, -except their competitors-, benefits. The only reason to want to destroy that is out of envy. Socialists feel better when others are made worse off, even if they are made worse off too in the process, because it quenches their envious nature.
Again,  pure nonsense. Monarchies and theocracies, among many other examples throughout history,  have set out to reduce the productivity of their citizens in  various ways. The church tithe is a classic example. And capitalism is NOT a meritocracy, it is a plutocracy. One only has to look at rich people nowadays in democratic societies. They are mostly not known for their high intelligence, to put it mildly, they are usually hopelessly corrupt or incompetent, and so on.
7
General Discussion / Re: is pussy juice paleo?
« Last post by Sally on Yesterday at 03:28:24 PM »
Yes
8
AVs claims were based entirely on his own opinions on what makes for an optimal diet, I respect many of his insights, but he is not the paragon of nutritional dogmatic truth.

Ive read his book and listened to many of his interviews. His teachings are so hard to take seriously because of his wild claims. I heard him recently saying he could have sold out and made millions of dollars not just as a diet guru, but as the face of some cigarette brand in the 70's.  I forget the exact quote, but it was something ridiculous like he turned down 7 million dollars to be the face of the brand.
9
Primal Diet / Re: Is my raw milk frozen?
« Last post by dariorpl on Yesterday at 08:09:29 AM »
AV said it was ok to freeze cream as in making icecream, as long as you consumed it within 24hs. I don't know if that means that the cream should be frozen for less than 24hs, or if it means that once it's frozen, within 24hs it will lose a lot of nutrients. I also don't know if he meant the same was ok for milk as a whole.
10
Off Topic / Re: Do not buy food raised by slaves- it is always nutrient-poor!
« Last post by dariorpl on Yesterday at 07:58:04 AM »
The democratic state itself  has no real power since the politicians are owned by special interests, those special interests usually being large companies.

If is through the State that they exert power, it is the State system where the power lies. For everybody else, it is considered a crime if they steal, murder, rape and torture. But for State agents, it is considered not only acceptable, but a social good (or necessary evil). The State is the only agency that people at large will accept this from. They won't accept it directly from the companies. Hence the power lies with the State, not the companies that happen to control it temporarily. And as I explained, many countries in the past and present have had very large, powerful and destructive States with not a single large company in sight, and while these companies were made illegal just like you propose. The problem is not the companies. The problem is the delusion that gets the masses to accept oppression if it's coming from someone in an official uniform. Your proposal makes these people in funny costumes a lot more powerful. Your proposal is nothing but rebranded socialism. And I'm not even sure about the rebranded part.

No, it isn't the same thing at all!  Attacking capitalism does not imply socialism at all, as there are multiple other  anti-capitalistic, non-socialist philosophies such as individual anarchism, fascism and libertarianism.

Capitalism simply means economic freedom for everyone in an area. Socialism means economic slavery for everyone or most in that area. There is only one axis along which this can be measured. You're either for freedom, or you're a socialist. Sure there are points along the middle of the line, like fascism. Libertarianism and capitalism in this sense are one and the same. Your ideology, by your own explanations and suggestions, is much closer to socialism than even to fascism.

However, a meritocratic society based on peoples' real personal value/contribution to society  rather than money, would be the best option.

That is what capitalism is.

Making them less productive is The Whole Point

Socialism is the only ideology which can claim that they want to reduce someone's productivity as a goal in and of itself. When someone is more productive in a civilized society based on trade, everybody in that society, -except their competitors-, benefits. The only reason to want to destroy that is out of envy. Socialists feel better when others are made worse off, even if they are made worse off too in the process, because it quenches their envious nature.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10