Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Qondrar_The_Redeemer

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
My personal experience, would suggest that, sun-baked meat, is the cream-of-the-crop of food. I've noticed that when I consume meat left in the sun for several hours, my stomach comes to life; I have a nice pleasant feeling in my gut, my bowel movements are smooth, and I'm generally more mellow and joyful. Another data point, that might be informative, is that my favorite food, by far, is sun-baked chicken breast... I haven't had it in some time, mostly because of logistic challenges, but I do crave it, and when I had it, it was so amazing, I almost felt like crying.

Interesting... I might try that sometime.

Health / Re: Cancer - Solutions?
« on: June 08, 2018, 11:53:33 pm »
Long-term water-fasting is known to help. Check out red light man for combo devices that may help:-

Stop smoking??!! Go ketogenic for a time, preferably raw ketogenic. Avoid alcohol. Exercise somewhat.
Not sure if they are willing to fast, be I guess I'll see. Have you tried the red light devices yourself, Tyler?

They don't smoke. I've already suggested they try a ketogenic, preferably raw ketogenic diet. They are also against meat (although they are very scared so who knows). Alcohol isn't a problem either. Exercise, if they can motivate themselves enough, I think that could be done.

Health / Cancer - Solutions?
« on: June 08, 2018, 05:30:43 pm »
One of the people I know may have lung cancer, I would be very interested in any advice all of you could give. Whether diet related or not.

I have quite a lot knowledge I've accumulated that might help them, although I would still be interested in hearing everything people here have to say. I would be interested in as many solutions as possible, thanks.

I actually thought nobody would ever listen to me regarding health, but perhaps this illness will convince them to listen to what I have to say.

Much like Tyler, I went 100% raw meat (I eat carnivorously, only meat) because I could not tolerate cooked foods well anymore. I haven't eaten a single cooked meal since then. Obviously since I personally couldn't look at raw meat as a vitamin supplement, as that is all I eat. I actually prefer the more nutritious organs and blood over the muscle.

I would recommend going only raw and avoiding cooked foods, it will make it easier in my opinion. But you can obviously try and slowly ease yourself into it, if you think that's something you'd rather do.

Carnivorous / Zero Carb Approach / Re: Gaining weight on zerocarb?
« on: June 07, 2018, 01:43:44 am »
Organs (excluding bone marrow) and muscle together, anywhere from 600-800 grams. But I eat 200-500 grams of bone marrow, along with what fat might be present on some of the other organs or muscle. So, of course, I get most of my calories from bone marrow. I also drink blood, but I'm not sure how much protein/fat/carbohydrates/calories that has. Maintaining weight isn't really much of a problem (as long as I don't fast), it's gaining that I need to eat more for.

General Discussion / Re: Raw meat changing one`s character?
« on: June 06, 2018, 05:51:57 am »
I think him changing is not necessarily related to raw meat. People change, for different reasons. I also don't think he's too aggressive, he's probably trying to be more dramatic to get more views. I do think he can be a bit arrogant at times, but again, I don't think he's like that in person.

I'm pretty sure he almost died, so that would also explain some of his strong convictions. I think it's actually a good thing that he's like this, it attracts more people to eating raw meat.

I've personally changed as well, yes. I certainly view things from a different perspective, and this might make me more selfish, although I wouldn't call myself more aggressive unless
attacked/provoked. If anything, I am very calm most of the time, compared to other people.

Thanks for that! I didn't read the whole article, but we've always found that we like aged, matured meat better. Presently, I have still in my fridge some of a mutton leg and other chunks that have been stored 4 and half months! Very tasty!
I would say I like aged/fermented meat, but I don't think anything is as invigorating/tasty as fresh organs/blood for me, while muscle and heart I find both aged/fermented equally as good.

Glad you like the study I posted.

Omnivorous Raw Paleo Diet / Re: My current diet
« on: June 06, 2018, 05:15:39 am »
I would recommend trying more fat, and incorporating organs. They are, after all, the most nutritious part of the animal, much more nutritious than muscle (liver has 10x times the amount in many nutrients, or even more than that). And in my opinion they taste good as well (not all of them are the same, obviously). You should also try and get grass-fed/pastured/organic/wild game in the case of organs and fat, as the difference between that and grain-fed is significant. And just so you know, the red liquid in rump steak is actually myoglobin.

I've actually uploaded a table now myself, and sorted it by pH so it is easier to read. Glad you're putting in a sticky, Tyler.

I found this to be quite interesting, most particularly the part about:  It is interesting to note that humans, uniquely among the primates so far considered, appear to have stomach pH values more akin to those of carrion feeders than to those of most carnivores and omnivores.

Definition of carrion feeder: Any animal that feeds on dead and rotting flesh.

Gastric acidity is likely a key factor shaping the diversity and composition of microbial communities found in the vertebrate gut. The study conducted a systematic review to test the hypothesis that a key role of the vertebrate stomach is to maintain the gut microbial community by filtering out novel microbial taxa before they pass into the intestines. The study proposes that species feeding either on carrion or on organisms that are close phylogenetic relatives should require the most restrictive filter (measured as high stomach acidity) as protection from foreign microbes. Conversely, species feeding on a lower trophic level or on food that is distantly related to them (e.g. herbivores) should require the least restrictive filter, as the risk of pathogen exposure is lower. Comparisons of stomach acidity across trophic groups in mammal and bird taxa show that scavengers and carnivores have significantly higher stomach acidities compared to herbivores or carnivores feeding on phylogenetically distant prey such as insects or fish. In addition, the study found when stomach acidity varies within species either naturally (with age) or in treatments such as bariatric surgery, the effects on gut bacterial pathogens and communities are in line with our hypothesis that the stomach acts as an ecological filter. Together these results highlight the importance of including measurements of gastric pH when investigating gut microbial dynamics within and across species.

Common NameTrophic GrouppH
Common BuzzardObligate Scavenger1.1
White Backed VultureObligate Scavenger1.2
Common Pied OystercatcherGeneralist Carnivore1.2
Bald EagleFacultative Scavenger1.3
Barn OwlFacultative Scavenger1.3
Little OwlFacultative Scavenger1.3
Common CrowObligate Scavenger1.3
Common MoorhenOmnivore1.4
HumansOmnivore1.5 (Can go down to 1)
FerretGeneralist Carnivore1.5
Wandering AlbatrossObligate Scavenger1.5
PossumFacultative Scavenger1.5
Black-Headed GullFacultative Scavenger1.5
Common KestrelGeneralist Carnivore1.5
Swainson's HawkFacultative Scavenger1.6
American BitternFacultative Scavenger1.7
Grey FalconFacultative Scavenger1.8
Peregrine FalconFacultative Scavenger1.8
Red Tailed HawkFacultative Scavenger1.8
Common StarlingSpecialist Carnivore/Insect2.0
Cynomolgus MonkeyOmnivore2.1
Mallard DuckOmnivore2.2
Magellanic PenguinSpecialist Carnivore/Fish2.3
Bottlenose DolphinsSpecialist Carnivore/Fish2.3
Gentoo PenguinSpecialist Carnivore/Fish2.5
Snowy OwlGeneralist Carnivore2.5
Domesticated PigOmnivore2.6
Woylie Brush Tailed BettongHerbivore/Hindgut2.8
King PenguinsSpecialist Carnivore/Fish2.9
Great CormorantSpecialist Carnivore/Fish3.0
Great Horned OwlGeneralist Carnivore3.1
Southern Hairy Nosed WombatHerbivore/Hindgut3.3
Skyes MonkeyOmnivore3.4
Crab-Eating MacaqueOmnivore3.6
CatGeneralist Carnivore3.6
Specialist Carnivore/Insect3.7
Guinea PigHerbivore/Foregut4.3
Howler MonkeyHerbivore/Hindgut4.5
DogFacultative Scavenger4.5
Common Pipistrelle BatSpecialist Carnivore/Insect5.1
Minke WhaleSpecialist Carnivore/Fish5.3
Brocket DeerHerbivore/Foregut5.5
Collared PeccaryHerbivore/Foregut5.8
Langur MonkeyHerbivore/Foregut5.9
Silver Leafed MonkeyHerbivore/Foregut5.9
Shetland PoniesHerbivore/Hindgut5.9
Colobus MonkeyHerbivore/Foregut6.3
EchidnaSpecialist Carnivore/Insect6.8

Obligate - Animals that depend solely on that diet.

Generalist - Is able to thrive in a wide variety of environmental conditions and can make use of a variety of different resources.

Specialist - Can thrive only in a narrow range of environmental conditions or has a limited diet. Eats only insects or fish as a carnivore, for example.

Facultative - Does best on a said diet, but can survive-but-not-thrive on a different one.


In total, the studies' literature search yielded data on 68 species (25 birds and 43 mammals) from seven trophic groups (Table 1). A general linear model based on diet explained much of the variation in the stomach pH (R2 = 0.63, F1,6 = 17.63, p < 0.01). The trophic groups that were most variable in terms of their stomach pH were omnivores and carnivores that specialize in eating insects or fish.

The studies' hypothesis was that foregut-fermenting herbivores and animals that feed on prey more phylogenetically–distant from them would have the least acidic stomachs. Tukey-Kramer comparisons indicated that scavengers (both obligate and facultative) had significantly higher stomach acidities compared to herbivores (both foregut and hindgut) and specialist carnivores feeding on phylogenetically distant prey. Specifically, foregut-fermenting herbivores had the least acidic stomachs of all trophic groups while omnivores and generalist carnivores, with more intermediate pH levels, were not distinguishable from any other group (Fig 1).

The special case of herbivory

Carrion feeding imposes one sort of constrain on the ecology of the gut, an increase in the potential for pathogens. Herbivory imposes another, the need to digest plant material refractory to enzymatic digestion (cellulose and lignin). In order to digest these compounds, herbivores rely disproportionately on microbial processes. Different regions of the gastrointestinal tract (either rumen, caecum or in the case of the hoatzin a folded crop) function primarily as fermentation chambers. Thus, a challenge with fermentative guts is favoring those microbes that are useful for digestion while reducing the risk of pathogen entry into the gut. The study suggests that because the threat of microbial pathogens is relatively low on live leaves , herbivores can afford to maintain a chamber that is modestly acidic and therefore less restrictive to microbial entry. However, it finds several interesting exceptions to this generality. Beavers, which are known to store food caches underwater where there is a high risk of exposure to a protozoan parasite Giardia lamblia, have very acidic stomachs. The high stomach acidity may have evolved to manage this prevalent environmental pathogen. The other herbivore in our dataset with a very acidic stomach is the rabbit, which provides an interesting example of a behavioral modification of the stomach environment. Rabbits are known to engage in frequent coprophagy which allows them re-inoculate themselves with microbes. The specialized soft pellets that house microbes also reduce the stomach acidity creating an environment suitable for fermentation.

Human evolution and stomach pH

It is interesting to note that humans, uniquely among the primates so far considered, appear to have stomach pH values more akin to those of carrion feeders than to those of most carnivores and omnivores. In the absence of good data on the pH of other hominoids, it is difficult to predict when such an acidic environment evolved. Baboons (Papio spp) have been argued to exhibit the most human–like of feeding and foraging strategies in terms of eclectic omnivory, but their stomachs–while considered generally acidic (pH = 3.7)–do not exhibit the extremely low pH seen in modern humans (pH = 1.5). One explanation for such acidity may be that carrion feeding was more important in humans (and more generally hominin) evolution than currently considered to be the case. Alternatively, in light of the number of fecal-oral pathogens that infect and kill humans, selection may have favored high stomach acidity, independent of diet, because of its role in pathogen prevention.

The human stomach and the loss of mutualistic microbes

In general, stomach acidity will tend to filter microbes without adaptations to an acidic environment. Such adaptations include resistant cell walls, spore-forming capabilities or other traits that confer tolerance to high acidities and rapid changes in pH conditions. The study considered the role of the stomach as a pathogen barrier within the context of human evolution. Another potential consequence of high stomach acidity, when considered in light of other primates and mammals, is the difficulty of recolonization by beneficial microbes. A large body of literature now suggests that a variety of human medical problems relate to the loss of mutualistic gut microbes, whether because those mutualists failed to colonize during hyper-clean C-section births or were lost through use of antibiotics, or other circumstances. The pH of the human stomach may make humans uniquely prone to such problems. In turn, it might be expected that, among domesticated animals, that similar problems should be most common in those animals that, like humans, have very acidic stomachs.

The special risk to juvenile and elderly humans

If, in carnivores and carrion-feeders, the stomach’s role is to act as an ecological filter then it would also be expected to see higher microbial diversity and pathogen loads in cases where stomach pH is higher. We see evidence of this in age-related changes in the stomach. Baseline stomach lumen pH in humans is approximately 1.5 (it can go down to 1) (Table 1). However, premature infants have less acidic stomachs (pH > 4) and are susceptibility to enteric infections. Similarly, the elderly show relatively low stomach acidity ( pH 6.6 in 80% of study participants) and are prone to bacterial infections in the stomach and gut. It is important to note that these differences may be related to differences in the strength of the immune system however it is argued here that the stomach needs more consideration when studying these patterns.


The study demonstrates that stomach acidity increases with the risk of food-borne pathogen exposure and propose that the stomach plays a significant role as an ecological filter and thus a strong selection factor in gut microbial community structure and primate evolution in particular. In light of modern lifestyle changes in diet, hygiene and medical interventions that alter stomach pH, we suggest that stomach acidity in humans is a double-edged sword. On one hand, the high acidity of the human stomach prevents pathogen exposure but it also decreases the likelihood of recolonization by beneficial microbes if and when they go missing. However, in those cases where acidity is reduced, the gut is more likely to be colonized by pathogens. Though it is widely discussed in both the medical and ecological literature, data on pH are actually very scarce. Thus, to fully understand the patterns highlighted here more detailed studies on the gut microbiota across stomach acidities and diet are required.

Personal Opinion: I find it interesting how the only other omnivore other than humans on the list with a pH below 2, is the Common Moorhen. Others with a pH below 2, were all facultative scavengers, obligate scavengers and generalist carnivores (as stated in the study: It is interesting to note that humans, uniquely among the primates so far considered, appear to have stomach pH values more akin to those of carrion feeders than to those of most carnivores and omnivores). Additionally, in the case of the elderly, I do indeed suspect that is it ill health which resulted in highest stomach pH, not in fact increased age. The study also shows the harmful effects of antibiotics and hyper-clean C-section births, among others.

The science section is the right place to post this, am I correct?


- [The Evolution of Stomach Acidity and Its Relevance to the Human Microbiome](

General Discussion / Re: Eating connective tissue
« on: May 30, 2018, 09:32:15 am »
Is there any benefit to eating connective tissue or should i just give it all to dogs?
Generally I dislike connective tissue. Perhaps I'll eat some very small pieces here and there, but for the most part, I avoid it. I try to avoid pieces I can't chew for better digestion, and most of them are bland and tasteless so it's not worth it in the end. I haven't noticed any benefits other than a heavy feeling in my stomach if I eat too much of them. If you find it good and can digest it well, then there are some nutrients you could get. But if you dislike it, it's not worth it in my opinion.

I really love thymus they are very savory and creamy, i also like pancreas a lot though its much more tangy almost sour but not really and in a good way. I think those two are my favorites though i do enjoy liver occasionally.
Thanks, I think I'll have to try thymus and pancreas.

General Discussion / Re: aged cheese much better than raw beef
« on: May 30, 2018, 09:25:46 am »
If this is true it goes against all raw meat thing..

I thought it was supposed to be "the easiest thing for us humans to digest"
It is for me. I can't tolerate plant foods in general. I don't really digest cooked lean meat well, and cooked/rendered fat gives me diarrhea. Raw meat I digest perfectly fine, and don't have any issues or constipation. Organ meats and the softer cuts of muscle are the easiest to digest, while some tougher cuts can be more difficult to digest, especially for certain people. Red meat (beef, veal, mutton, lamb, wild game etc...) is generally harder to digest than fish/poultry. I generally digest everything fine, except some tougher cuts of muscle which give me a more heavy feeling in my stomach, but that's all.

Generally, nothing applies to everyone. Perhaps the people that can't digest it as well, as norawnofun has already said, have low gastric acid. Perhaps they overeating, everyone has their own limit. Could depend on the specific animal or quality as well.

Personals / Re: Contacting Sv3rige
« on: May 28, 2018, 05:19:38 am »
depends which source,, I saw your source as cited...  Others state that 20 percent is organic matter which is mainly proteins/collagen  and growth factors etc.   So yes, mostly minerals, but tightly bound with proteins.
   I don't doubt there is value to eating cooked bones, peoples have benefited for eons.
Well, the source does say 10-20% and 60-70%. 60+10=70%. So 30% could potentially be collagen, proteins and inorganic salts.

Well, Derek seems to be benefiting from it, right now. Although I am interested how much of a difference it would make if he consumed raw bones (smaller bones or bone meal).

Personals / Re: Contacting Sv3rige
« on: May 28, 2018, 01:24:40 am »
I don't know Derick, bones, I've heard are mostly protein. ??
What? Where did you read/hear that? Bones should contain about 10 to 20 percent water and 60 to 70 percent bone mineral. The remaining material is mostly collagen with trace amounts of proteins and inorganic salts.

I already eat liver, marrow, kidneys and heart (and drink blood). Brain has simply not been available until now, so I look forward to trying that eventually along with tongue and testicles. I agree with you regarding the taste of the marrow, I actually think raw marrow is the best food I've ever tried, even better than anything I used to eat on standard cooked diet. Regarding liver, how much did you eat? I eat 100-200 grams a day and think it's great, although if I suddenly stop tolerating it, I will obviously stop. Thanks for the information regarding brain, I have a source which has some very good meat, close to the taste of wild game. Not quite, but I can't get any organs from wild game so it's not like I have much of a choice. Regarding blood, I find it invigorating, where as before the other grain-fed and grass-fed sources were different. Although I've never been able to get it from wild game, so I've no idea what that would be like. What happened with the stag testicles?

I'm also interested about the various glands and other parts. I know, for example, that by far the highest source of Iodine is in the thyroid gland. I'm sure other organs are all unique in the potential benefits they may offer.

Since as of recently I am able to get any part of the animal, I have already started including some more organ meats (and blood). Any suggestions on what organs/parts of the animal I should get? And what kind nutrient content it has, your personal experience with it (taste, did you get any positive benefits from it etc...). I think it would be particularly interesting to talk about some organ meats that are less known.

General Discussion / Re: Enema - Colonic administration Guidelines
« on: May 23, 2018, 06:01:43 am »
I used to do enemas some time ago. Ever since I started eating naturally I've not been constipated once. I only have a bowel movement once a week (perhaps this is because I used to eat so much processed food, carbohydrates, fiber etc... that I became dependent on it), but I don't have any problem with that. My stools are perfectly fine.

I would honestly say that unless you know you are constipated, you should not do enemas. If you are eating a natural diet, you should not use enemas to detox.

If you plan on doing it, time does not matter in my opinion. You can clean it with whatever you want, although I would suggest avoiding anything that you wouldn't put in your mouth. Eat whenever. You should retain the liquid until you can't anymore. Depending on where the blockage is, you might need to use more or less liquid. I used water and olive oil enemas myself.

Goodsamaritan is probably the better person to ask, since he seems to use this on other people all the time.

As I've already, I don't recommend doing enemas at all unless you absolutely have to. Otherwise you might get dependent on them and then you'll want to use them more and more... Until eventually you'll cause yourself more problems than it was worth.

Personals / Re: Contacting Sv3rige
« on: May 21, 2018, 05:51:23 am »
You're saying you couldn't get enough minerals from fish?
What about oysters/mussels? Oysters especially are so salty to me, it would be hard to not get enough minerals from them. They are traditionally eaten raw as well..
Looking at it from a mineral perspective, oysters tend to be very high (sometimes the highest, depending on the species) in zinc, high in copper and selenium. Potassium, magnesium and sodium tends to be similar between fish, oysters and land animals. Although it could be the salt water you are tasting, in which case you would be getting some additional minerals, albeit not much. Mostly some extra sodium.
With all the organs he eats, he should easily be getting all the selenium, manganese, copper, zinc, phosphorus, iron and calcium. The only ones (and only if he is not consuming a large enough volume of food) which in general would be below recommended daily intake would be magnesium, potassium and sodium. Blood has a pretty high potassium and sodium content, although it is not as high in magnesium. On paper he should be getting everything. It's also very bioavailable.

But there's probably more to it than just paper values of what you should be getting. And looking at it, he should mostly be getting calcium and phosphorus from bones.

Personals / Re: Contacting Sv3rige
« on: May 21, 2018, 03:49:36 am »
Very interesting. Do you eat any other animals than sheep? You could get more blood and marrow from larger animals, along with any other parts of the animal (organs, muscle, whatever).
And if you do only eat sheep, any reason why you prefer sheep over other animals?

Also, in regards to bones, how much do you eat?

General Discussion / Re: Cold vs Room temp meat
« on: May 20, 2018, 05:47:09 pm »
I don't find much of a difference between cold and room temperature, meat, personally. Although usually the inside is not as cold as the outside, and it might depend on your refrigerator temperature as well. Blood I prefer to leave outside for a while, as I dislike cold liquids. As dariorpl already said, in some areas, the meat could remain warm, albeit not from the animal itself, while in others it might even freeze.

If you could get meat from an animal that was very recently killed and is still warm, that would probably be the best. It might explain why a lot humans tend to favor warm meat (and to an extent cooked meat?).

Personals / Re: Contacting Sv3rige
« on: May 19, 2018, 11:11:36 pm »
I'd love to see the source for the ca. in marrow.  thanks
Marrow has around 277.3 to 339.7 mg of calcium per 100 grams (in reindeer) according to this:

Level of selected nutrients in meat, liver, tallow and bone marrow from semi-domesticated reindeer (Rangifer t. tarandus L.):

It shows plenty of other vitamins/minerals/proteins/fats in reindeer  muscle, liver, tallow and bone marrow.

Carnivorous / Zero Carb Approach / Re: Bitter Meat?
« on: May 19, 2018, 06:07:55 pm »
I have sometimes left raw meat in  vacuum-packed plastic for as much as 7 to 10 days. Generally, after 6 days, the meat would taste really nasty with a sharp, bitter taste, which does not appear in "high-meat" that has been regularly aired - so I would throw it away.If that is what you mean, I strongly advise you to avoid it like the plague.
Yes, that is exactly what it tasted it like. Tasted toxic. The taste remained in my mouth for an hour afterwards, despite quickly spitting it out after the first bite. It was also sticky, which might explain why the taste remained there for so long. I already had a similar experience when I first started eating raw meat. I ate some bone marrow I shouldn't have, and it resulted in the most intense bowel movement of my life. I've never eaten anything that hasn't tasted quite right since then.

And you were, right. I actually did leave it in vacuum-packed plastic for too long. I did however want to know if anyone had any experience with bitter tasting meat.

Personals / Re: Contacting Sv3rige
« on: May 19, 2018, 02:06:59 pm »

But what about the lower limits?

How could we get calcium and phosphorous from organs and meat diet only?
I don't mean to discourage anyone from eating bones, I just personally think it is more natural to eat smaller bones raw than larger ones cooked. Perhaps Derek is on to something, and the extremely large amounts of calcium and phosphorus are useful, I couldn't say. You could also eat lower amount, no need to overeat on bones. Although I am curious just how much is actually absorbed.

The best source of calcium other than bones would be bone marrow. Phosphorus is present in all types of meat (muscle and organs), and shouldn't be a problem.

Carnivorous / Zero Carb Approach / Bitter Meat?
« on: May 19, 2018, 11:18:00 am »
I've just tasted some very bitter fermented (high meat). No meat has ever taste like this before. I think I screwed up this time by letting sit in the original package for too long and only then letting it air. I don't think this is something I'm going to eat, since I trust my instinct more than I'm willing to experiment with bitter meat.

Any thoughts? Do you think a bitter flavor is a sign to be alarmed at?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk