Author Topic: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health  (Read 137541 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 24isours

  • Buffalo Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #200 on: March 14, 2014, 08:39:38 pm »
While eating RZC I've noticed it is much easier to over eat muscle meat when one doesn't eat enough fat a long with it. If one over eats protein without enough fat or carbs for long periods of time 'rabbit starvation' has been known to develop. I've witnessed this first hand a few times.

Eating a diet lower in fat and higher in protein and sugar (which seems to be what Instincto is based on - correct me if I am wrong) seems to keep the body continuously hungry due to the insulin spikes, insignificant healthy fats to keep one satiated, as well as the blunting effects fructose has on our bodies' ability to let us know we are full. There are plenty of studies that show fructose can continue to make us hungry if eaten in significant amounts (of course these amounts are different for each of us).

So, keeping the body running off of glucose ( a diet high in protein, sugar, or both) to me would be a huge factor in contributing to the development of tumors , diabetes and cancer. The research is there if you look for it.
3 Years on a Strictly Raw Ketogenic Carnivorous Diet.
*Currently still on a Ketogenic diet but have now incorporated raw vegetables.

Offline Iguana

  • Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: GCB: Eating meat too often could be harmful to health
« Reply #201 on: March 14, 2014, 10:14:36 pm »
 
While eating RZC I've noticed it is much easier to over eat muscle meat when one doesn't eat enough fat a long with it. If one over eats protein without enough fat or carbs for long periods of time 'rabbit starvation' has been known to develop. I've witnessed this first hand a few times.

Sure. That’s why we are usually fond of fat. Most of us eat all the appetizing animal fat we can digest when we find enough, but we seldom get enough bone marrow and other yummy animal fats. As I said many times, it seems easy for you in USA as you just have to order fat and bones from some companies or farmers commercializing exclusively grass fed meat. This is a very unnatural situation: elsewhere it’s much more difficult to get fats from properly grass fed animals and the wild animals we sometimes get don’t have much fat. So, we generally like to eat as well avocados, durians, safus, coconuts and various other nuts.   

Quote
Eating a diet lower in fat and higher in protein and sugar (which seems to be what Instincto is based on - correct me if I am wrong) seems to keep the body continuously hungry due to the insulin spikes.

“Instincto” is not based on any nutrient or food class, be it plants, animals, sugars, carbs, fat or proteins. It’s not even a dietary method in the usual meaning, being clearly the opposite of all dietary systems since it aims to allow each individual to find naturally his/her specific and transient fluctuating proper balance between those various nutrients and foods, just as animals find it spontaneously when they have no access to processed modern and Neolithic “foods” or artificial substances.  ;)   
« Last Edit: March 17, 2014, 09:11:33 pm by Iguana »
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline van

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,769
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #202 on: March 15, 2014, 12:06:10 am »
It would be so interesting Iguana if someday you were able to find substantial animal fats to adjust to and satisfy yourself with (might take a few months to shift over).   I for one do rather poorly trying to nourish myself with durian (even though I love them maybe more than any other food) avocados,nuts, seeds, and coconuts.  None of those oily foods have fats that compare to animal fats.  And my guess is the composition, which also is my guess is that you're not particularly interested in. 

Offline sabertooth

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,149
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #203 on: March 15, 2014, 12:10:56 pm »

Sure. That’s why we are usually fond of fat. Most of us eat all the appetizing animal fat we can digest when we find enough, but we seldom get enough bone marrow and other yummy animal fats. As I said many times, it seems easy for you in USA as you just have to order fat and bones from some companies or farmers commercializing exclusively grass fed meat. This is a very unnatural situation: elsewhere it’s much more difficult to get fats from properly grass fed animals and the wild animals we sometimes get don’t have much fat. So, we generally like to eat as well avocados, durians, safus, coconuts and various other nuts.   
 


This isn't true, If you really wanted to you could obtain plenty of animal fat and still eat instinctively.

I buy whole sheep on hoof, and if they are allowed to age naturally on rich pasture, they will get very fat. The last ewe I have gotten was four years old, and totally grass fed. I bought her for fifty dollars. Had twenty pounds of belly fat. It was marbled throughout. The limbs had large deposits of fat, the rib meat and back was covered in a soft creamy goodness.

 Keto heaven...
A man who makes a beast of himself, forgets the pain of being a man.

Offline Inger

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
  • Gender: Female
  • 38 yo Norwegian RVAF s.-06, 90% carniv.
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #204 on: March 15, 2014, 04:00:46 pm »
hehe... Francois... durian, avocado, safu.. those are not unnatural? lol you alwasy amaze me with your logic  ;)

I second what Sabertooth say, also our sheep that are only pastured + hay in the winter have lots of fat on them in fall!
Here are also those seals living that are very fatty too... but you are not allowed to kill them tho. So I bet long ago when nature was untouched there was fat enough to find. At least in fall and winter to eat. To get leaner in summer is pretty natural and that is when  you eat leaner meat and some other vegetation maybe depending on where you live. I am 100% certain about the very natural fact, carbs do not belong in winter diet if they are not to catch in our environment!

Offline Inger

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
  • Gender: Female
  • 38 yo Norwegian RVAF s.-06, 90% carniv.
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #205 on: March 15, 2014, 04:02:16 pm »
hehe... Francois... durian, avocado, safu.. those are not unnatural? lol you alwasy amaze me with your logic  ;)

I second what Sabertooth say, also our sheep that are only pastured + hay in the winter have lots of fat on them in fall!
Here are also those seals living that are very fatty too... but you are not allowed to kill them tho. So I bet long ago when nature was untouched there was fat enough to find. At least in fall and winter to eat. To get leaner in summer is pretty natural and that is when  you eat leaner meat and some other vegetation maybe depending on where you live. I am 100% certain about the very natural fact, carbs do not belong in winter diet if they are not to catch in our environment!

I could certainly eat some imported durian here is summer if I am healthy and tan and earth a lot outside, without ill effects. But to do that in the dark and cold winter? A big mistake IMHO that is kind of as unnatural as it gets!

Offline Iguana

  • Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: GCB: Eating meat too often could be harmful to health
« Reply #206 on: March 15, 2014, 08:38:07 pm »
This isn't true, If you really wanted to you could obtain plenty of animal fat and still eat instinctively.
Derek, you and Inger are welcome here to show me how easy it is to get sheep which never received any industrial feed, grain, vaccines and drugs. The first website I checked says (excerpts):
Quote
Creep feeding is a means of supplying extra nutrition, usually grain, to nursing lambs.

At a young age lambs prefer feeds that are finely ground and have a small particle size. Feeds that have high palatability for lambs include soybean meal, ground corn, and alfalfa hay. Some producers start lambs out on soybean meal. It is expensive, but the lambs do not eat much at an early age. Crumbled or textured rations are consumed better than pelleted creep feeds. The feed should be fresh and dry and should never be allowed to run out.

The creep feed should contain a coccidiostat to prevent coccidiosis. Deccox® (decoquinate) and Bovatec® (lasalocid) are both FDA-approved as coccidiostats for lambs. Rumensin® (monensin) is another coccidiostat, but it is not FDA-approved for lambs. Lambs should be vaccinated with Clostridium perfringins C & D to prevent overeating disease prior to weaning.


hehe... Francois... durian, avocado, safu.. those are not unnatural? lol you alwasy amaze me with your logic  ;)
Safu is a wild fatty fruit and there are completely wild durians as well. Avocados certainly have a wild ancestor, just like mouflon is the wild ancestor of sheep. So, sheep are no more natural than avocados, but anyway you’re lucky to have you own sheep. In Switzerland and in  France I could sometimes buy New Zealand lamb legs, but I never saw any here. True, there’s fat on it and marrow in the bones, but not enough to entirely feed a man unless you buy many, eat the fat and throw most of the muscle.

Even if it’s not completely natural to eat cultivated avocados, specially when you’re not in the exact place where some ancestor grew wild initially, isn’t it better than eating margarine? 

Quote
At least in fall and winter to eat. To get leaner in summer is pretty natural and that is when  you eat leaner meat and some other vegetation maybe depending on where you live. I am 100% certain about the very natural fact, carbs do not belong in winter diet if they are not to catch in our environment!
It’s good that you’re 100% certain about something, because I’m not 100% sure of almost everything. You‘ve got to come here and see for yourself what is around to eat in winter, and even all year round. About the only food to be found and easily caught in the wilderness here are limpets — and arbutus in autumn until the end of the year.  I've neither tried earthworms nor trees’ roots and bark yet. 
« Last Edit: March 17, 2014, 09:11:05 pm by Iguana »
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline Iguana

  • Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: GCB: Eating meat too often could be harmful to health
« Reply #207 on: March 15, 2014, 10:05:42 pm »
 
I agree that rejecting all forms of processing, even traditional ones, is unproven and likely unwise in the longer term, especially in the current societies that don't have easy access to many of the traditional foods of the ancient past. I don't adhere to Instincto rules on that. I also think that strictly adhering to purist notions re: processing and rawness while ignoring other important aspects of foods, such as their content of RS, glycans, mucins, inulin, etc. is not supported by the growing evidence.

It seems to me it is rather food processing which is comparatively new and unproven, since eating unprocessed food has been proven during millions years by all animals, anthropoids and hominids. Sure, we should try to find as many as possible traditional foods of the Paleolithic era, but the range available almost everywhere nowadays is considerable if we aren’t… too purists  ;) about their provenance, artificial selection during the last millenniums and method of cultivation.

But, of course, if the range of foods edible raw is too limited, then it’s better to cook some stuff inedible raw rather than starve or get deficiencies.

One of the majors drawbacks of processing such as mixing, juicing or grinding is precisely that it can lead to over-consumption of plant foods and ingesting them in amounts where our body can no longer neutralize their anti-nutrients, which then become really noxious. Another similar point is that one particular, individual plant or part of a generally edible plant species can be loaded with much more anti-nutrients than average, and when mixed, ground together with other parts, it becomes unnoticeable.   
« Last Edit: March 17, 2014, 09:10:31 pm by Iguana »
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline sabertooth

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,149
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #208 on: March 16, 2014, 02:57:37 am »
Where there is a will there is a way :)

Find a way farms. http://www.findawayfarm.com/

This is just one of hundreds of small family farms that is within a two hour drive from my home base.  Albeit, I must admit that living in the bluegrass region close to the ohio river valley has its advantages. The whole region where I live was once the basin of a great lake, which gives us some of the best grazing land on the planet.

I still say that throughout Europe there must be small farms that pasture raise animals, and these farmers would have older fatter animals available if there was a higher demand.

The last ewe I bought was a fat 170 pounds, and because it was four years old, the local stockyards will only give 50 dollars for it, so the guy only charged me 50 dollars to pick it up.

It took me 5 hours driving time and 40 dollars gas, but considering its a months worth of meat for 90 dollars, it wasn't a bad score.

Perhaps the issue with availability of fat grass fed animals is dependent on the fact that in some places the local family farmer does not have the resources to set up web sites, so is much harder for people like Iguana to locate?
A man who makes a beast of himself, forgets the pain of being a man.

Offline eveheart

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,315
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #209 on: March 16, 2014, 03:26:28 am »
Derek, you and Inger are welcome here to show me how easy it is to get sheep which never received any industrial feed, grain, vaccines and drugs. The first website I checked says [quote about creep feeding]

Well then, check the second website! Hunting for food was never that easy... you might have to make a net, fashion a spear, run for days, and click on many links.
"I intend to live forever; so far, so good." -Steven Wright, comedian

Offline Inger

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
  • Gender: Female
  • 38 yo Norwegian RVAF s.-06, 90% carniv.
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #210 on: March 16, 2014, 07:01:07 pm »
lol Eveheart - that is some truth in your post above for sure ;)

(nothing good comes easy in life...;)..)

Offline Iguana

  • Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: GCB: Eating meat too often could be harmful to health
« Reply #211 on: March 17, 2014, 04:01:13 am »
I posted that link to show that « creep feeding » is generalized. If we find a farmer who doesn’t do it, he’ll certainly give his leftover bread and whatever cooked leftovers to the animals. Any farmer eating cooked food can't be trusted. 

Anyway, what would be the point of buying a lot of mutton to eat only the fat and throw the muscle? And if all cultivated fruits should be completely avoided, as you suggest, Inger, why wouldn’t it be the same for meat of farmed animals? 

I still have in my fridge some donkey meat that I brought from 1350 km away, but I ate all the tiny bits of fat and there’s no more left.

Meanwhile, I’ve been thinking about this:
Telling Inger that she failed with what she thought was the right way to practice instinctive nutrition is dogmatic. If instinctotherapie requires "proper training with somebody experienced along," then there is something wrong with the theory. Conversely, if there are many different outcomes in individuals following the instinctive eating method, then the theory is sound.
Yes, my experience and that of many others has also been to be wary of dietary theories that require perfection or near-perfection to succeed. If a dietary approach is truly beneficial, it will not require perfection for success. There will be wiggle room.
If we lack a proper training, we are like those orangutans born in captivity who are unable to live in the wild after being released. It is even worse for us because we’ve been conditioned since early childhood to eat in a way which is the exact opposite of what it should be.

I think another difficulty arises from the fact that we live in an artificial situation, lacking the pressure of an unspoiled, wild environment. We are like walking on the crest of mountain chain, and as soon as we diverge by going a bit down from that crest, it’s very easy to slide down some more... while it’s very difficult to go up again.  Not only are processed foods (even raw but ground, juiced, spiced or mixed), grain and dairy addictive, their consumption is not properly limited by our instinct, which induce overloads. In turn, these overloads prevent us to eat the unprocessed equivalent since we fall directly on the instinctive barrier with it.

That explains why the humanity as a whole came down to cooking and agriculture as soon as it found the way to do it. It also explains why wild animals are fond of cooked and processed food.  Thus it’s so easy to slide down if we stray a bit away from  the narrow  path at the top of the crest: our situation is unstable. We have to constantly compensate this instability with our intelligence and with our will to stay on the top, and the more ideal is our nutrition, the less we have to compensate and easiest it is.

I completely agree with this quote of Gerard:
…We cannot expect that the damage brought about by tens of years of agressive diets can be merely reversed within a few weeks or months. And it is also likely that every damage may not be reversed at least not in our own lifetime but will possibly need several generations to heal as in Pottenger's cat experiment.

Yet there are now more and more compelling reasons and available experiences to believe that it is really worth to stay patiently on RPD. And so many ailments are in fact at least alleviated already after a few months. Quite rewarding.

These "scientific" considerations mean also that there is not necessarily a causal relationship between a given recent improvement or change in health and what has been done just during the weeks or even months before. A more or less sudden improvement might well be the global result of a healing process that took several years of RPD and other changes in lifestyle to mature and succeed
.


This fact that cause and effect in complex systems are distant in time and space adds to the difficulty to correctly interpret the events. For example, meticulous and long observations with hundreds of people have shown that fruits appear to activate the elimination of carbs previously eaten in cooked grains. Eating fruits should thus be limited whenever they trigger too strong “detox” reactions, something that particularly happens at the beginning if we were not used to eat fruits in a normal amount.

Interpreting correctly such a reaction is very difficult as we would naturally think that we shouldn't eat fruits anymore, while on the contrary we should continue with small amounts gradually increased as the reactions reduce.       
« Last Edit: March 17, 2014, 09:09:54 pm by Iguana »
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #212 on: March 17, 2014, 06:58:02 am »
@Tyler:
I do not view drying and freezing as ideal processes but sometimes they have to be used in order to prolong the usability of a particular food.
OK, thanks, sounds like they are at least minimally acceptable, even if not ideal.

Quote
No idea re Hadza's daily consumption as anyway they would have encountered different access to their food depending on weather activity etc. etc.
So if you don't know what their daily consumption levels were, then it's possible that they could have consumed a significant amount at least part of the year, regardless of whether tubers are their favorite food or not, yes?

Quote
A raw food with lots of antinutrients is just as bad as a cooked food with lots of heat-created toxins. Both are not dersigned to be eaten.
That still leaves the question of how much is "lots of antinutrients". In the past, I think you used bitterness as the determining factor on that, yes? If so, did you mean any bitterness at all, or excessive bitterness that makes it unpalatable? Presumably if that's the standard, then a raw plant food that is not particularly bitter is OK to eat (when it comes to antinutrients), yes?

-----------

@Iguana:

But, of course, if the range of foods edible raw is too limited, then it’s better to cook some stuff inedible raw rather than starve or get deficiencies.
Right, and many of the foods of millions of years ago have not been available to humans in their original forms for thousands of years, which is one of the probable reasons that various types of natural processing were used, among others.

Besides, even if they were all still available, the natural phenomenon of hormesis and decently robust health should enable one to survive a less than 100% perfect approach. If humans were so fragile as to require dietary perfection, the species would not have survived. Of course, those who are less robust may need to follow a stricter approach, but there are potential risks to that too, of which you mentioned a couple common ones (undereating and deficiencies).

Overconsumption is not an issue for me. It still makes more sense to me that a truly healthy diet will be one that has some wiggle room, rather than one that requires detailed perfection that most people fail to achieve, sorry. It sounds like there is some possible agreement on that between us, at least when it comes to provenance and artificial selection.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2014, 11:04:17 am by PaleoPhil »
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline Iguana

  • Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: GCB: Eating meat too often could be harmful to health
« Reply #213 on: March 17, 2014, 03:30:50 pm »
@Iguana:
Right, and many of the foods of millions of years ago have not been available to humans in their original forms for thousands of years, which is one of the probable reasons that various types of natural processing were used, among others.

I don’t see why those foods could have been suddenly unavailable before agriculture started. Farming spread after cooking and other processes became used for food, as agriculture  was certainly a result of food processing rather than the opposite. 

Quote
Besides, even if they were all still available, the natural phenomenon of hormesis and decently robust health should enable one to survive a less than 100% perfect approach. If humans were so fragile as to require dietary perfection, the species would not have survived. Of course, those who are less robust may need to follow a stricter approach, but there are potential risks to that too, of which you mentioned a couple common ones (undereating and deficiencies).

Phil, you completely misunderstood what I wrote! Of course, it is obvious that we are able to survive with an imperfect nutrition: 7 billion people on Earth live with a mostly cooked diet!

What I meant is that “a difficulty arises from the fact that we live in an artificial situation, lacking the pressure of an unspoiled, wild environment” and “ we lack a proper training, (having been  been) conditioned since early childhood to eat in a way which is the exact opposite of what it should be.”

Thus, it’s easier for us to eat 100% unprocessed raw foods rather than having a processed meal once in a way, which will get us down on the slippery slope, away from the path on the crest and making it difficult to climb again to that crest.

We’ve seen so many people who used to occasionally eat some processed food slowly sliding down the slope after years or decades of 90 or 95% “instinctonutrition” and finally falling to a completely standard cooked diet, being unable to get back to a raw paleo diet even if they wanted to. It happened to my sister, to a girlfriend and to friends of mine. This difficulty would not be there if we lived in a world where fire and tools to process food were unavailable. But being surrounded by a crowd of people eating a standard modern diet while living in a civilisation where processed food are so easily available is a completely novel, artificial and abnormal situation which renders our raw paleo way instable.   

Quote
Overconsumption is not an issue for me. It still makes more sense to me that a truly healthy diet will be one that has some wiggle room, rather than one that requires detailed perfection that most people fail to achieve, sorry. It sounds like there is some possible agreement on that between us, at least when it comes to provenance and artificial selection.

Yes, we agree on that, although over-consumption is a severe issue for me when I’m at home lonely and bored with plenty of various delicious raw paleo foods around me!  ;)
« Last Edit: March 17, 2014, 09:09:07 pm by Iguana »
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #214 on: March 17, 2014, 03:47:06 pm »
@Tyler:OK, thanks, sounds like they are at least minimally acceptable, even if not ideal.
Not acceptable, just "less worse" than many other methods.
Quote
So if you don't know what their daily consumption levels were, then it's possible that they could have consumed a significant amount at least part of the year, regardless of whether tubers are their favorite food or not, yes?
Unlikely. if they did not like the taste, they would only have eaten them in times of famine.
Quote
That still leaves the question of how much is "lots of antinutrients". In the past, I think you used bitterness as the determining factor on that, yes? If so, did you mean any bitterness at all, or excessive bitterness that makes it unpalatable? Presumably if that's the standard, then a raw plant food that is not particularly bitter is OK to eat (when it comes to antinutrients), yes?
No, it is not only a question of bitterness. Generally speaking, the worse it tastes, the higher the levels of antinutrients there will be. Blandness of taste, too, is a sign, imo.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2014, 06:39:35 pm by Iguana »
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline sabertooth

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,149
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #215 on: March 18, 2014, 06:25:51 am »
I posted that link to show that « creep feeding » is generalized. If we find a farmer who doesn’t do it, he’ll certainly give his leftover bread and whatever cooked leftovers to the animals. Any farmer eating cooked food can't be trusted. 

Anyway, what would be the point of buying a lot of mutton to eat only the fat and throw the muscle? And if all cultivated fruits should be completely avoided, as you suggest, Inger, why wouldn’t it be the same for meat of farmed animals? 

I still have in my fridge some donkey meat that I brought from 1350 km away, but I ate all the tiny bits of fat and there’s no more left.

Iguana,

Im not sure what kind of first hand experience you have with going out to farms and judging the quality of animals from an instinctive point of view?  I have been doing this for over 5 years, and have been able to locate some very fat, all pasture raised, animals that would make my iced aged ancestors salivate with joy.

If the animal is fat enough you will not need to throw any of the muscle meat out in order to avoid protein overload. On an optimally fat, fully mature sheep there should be enough fat so that the entire animal would be a complete source of the bulk of ones nutritional needs.

I understand your concerns regarding quality all to well, and will also warn people about questionable farm practices.

Still, I think you are being far too dismissive of the approach to seeking out the fattest and healthiest animals possible.

Even if you are not 90 percent carnivorous like myself, I think it would be beneficial for most people to eat large amounts of meat regularly.

Having interpreted this thread as a personal attack upon the core principles of a meat based paleo diet,  I would like to make a point regarding the Instincto stance against heavy meat consumption. There may be a correlation between heavy meat consumption and health problems for people following GBC, though even if this is true, I believe the correlation is in no way proof that the harmful effects of meat consumption in instinctos apply to everyone.

Let us consider all the other factors involved before jumping to such conclusions...

Are the animals that are being eaten of paleo quality, and untouched by pollution, drugs, vaccines, and unnatural foods, ect?

Are these dieters eating the entire animal, the fats, bone marrow, eye balls, glands, and other organs as well?

Do they ingest enough aged animal flesh that contain the probiotics necessary for optimal digestion of a meat besed diet?

Are those following GBC also eating cultivated fruits and vegetables that are not paleo quality?

Even organic produce of today does not resemble the foods that our ancestors would likely find forraging?

Then there is the question of portions and food combinations to consider?

Eating large amounts of cultivated fruit and vegetables, combine with raw meat, may indeed be harmful to your health, but I insist that meat consumption is not the primary culprit for health issues in those following GBCs recommendations.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2014, 05:52:35 pm by Iguana »
A man who makes a beast of himself, forgets the pain of being a man.

Offline Inger

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
  • Gender: Female
  • 38 yo Norwegian RVAF s.-06, 90% carniv.
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #216 on: March 18, 2014, 03:31:09 pm »
Good points ST.

I very much think the reason for issues with high protein are not the protein itself.... but other things
not that I advocate a super high protein diet, I think the fat and the "other things on the animal" are very important, as Saber says. Also, I think seafood should be the mains source protein to make us optimal. Still, I no way think red meat from naturally fed animals are dangerous - but the condition the person lives in / other things she/he eats are the culprit

I myself eat above 100 g pure protein / day regularly (almost every day) for 4 years but I do lots of fat, seafood, organs..... and close to zero... sugar (fruits and veggies)
I also explore my natural habitat ;)

Offline Iguana

  • Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: GCB: Eating meat too often could be harmful to health
« Reply #217 on: March 18, 2014, 06:51:15 pm »
 
Im not sure what kind of first hand experience you have with going out to farms and judging the quality of animals from an instinctive point of view?
That’s a very difficult task that probably no one can perform reliably. If the animal has been really badly fed, then an abnormal flavor can be perceived in its meat by a thoroughly experienced person. Personally, I’m unable to tell. And if the animal has received medication, vaccinations or occasional heated or cooked supplements, even the best expert can’t perceive it. The only indication will be that some people will be more or less sick after consuming a sufficient amount. 

Quote
I have been doing this for over 5 years, and have been able to locate some very fat, all pasture raised, animals that would make my iced aged ancestors salivate with joy.
Because an animal has a lot of fat, does it mean that it never received any processed food or medication? I doubt very much. 

Quote
If the animal is fat enough you will not need to throw any of the muscle meat out in order to avoid protein overload. On an optimally fat, fully mature sheep there should be enough fat so that the entire animal would be a complete source of the bulk of ones nutritional needs.
Perhaps for sheep, but I don’t think it’s wise to eat mainly mutton regularly during several years. Better go for a variety of mostly wild animals, seafood, eggs, poultry, etc.

Quote
Even if you are not 90 percent carnivorous like myself, I think it would be beneficial for most people to eat large amounts of meat regularly.
Yes, I agree: it is often beneficial, specially during a certain period. But on the long run, it is highly recommended to have the broadest variety of meats, as much as possible from wild animals, and to alternate with non mammal meats and other sources of animal foods.

Quote
Having interpreted this thread as a personal attack upon the core principles of a meat based paleo diet,  I would like to make a point regarding the Instincto stance against heavy meat consumption. There may be a correlation between heavy meat consumption and health problems for people following GBC, though even if this is true, I believe the correlation is in no way proof that the harmful effects of meat consumption in instinctos apply to everyone.
Oh, no, I don’t see this thread initiated by Hanna as a personal attack against meat based paleo diet. I felt it was rather intended as a personal attack against GCB and against me. I agree there’s no proof, and as I wrote already, about all old timers instinctos including myself didn’t believe GCB’s explanations. But after reconsidering the issue with the infos available, including the ones posted by PaleoPhil, it seems factual that regular large consumption of red meat during long periods could be dangerous in the long term.

Quote
Are the animals that are being eaten of paleo quality, and untouched by pollution, drugs, vaccines, and unnatural foods, ect?
Are these dieters eating the entire animal, the fats, bone marrow, eye balls, glands, and other organs as well?
Do they ingest enough aged animal flesh that contain the probiotics necessary for optimal digestion of a meat besed diet?
Most of us are very concerned about the quality of the animal food we eat. But it's true that during several years, many had been fooled by an unscrupulous stockbreeder. Most of the long term instincto practitioners I know are very fond of bone marrow and organs. 

Quote
Are those following GBC also eating cultivated fruits and vegetables that are not paleo quality? Even organic produce of today does not resemble the foods that our ancestors would likely find forraging?
Yes. It’s really difficult to find wild, completely paleo vegetables!

Quote
Then there is the question of portions and food combinations to consider?
Yes, also.

Quote
Eating large amounts of cultivated fruit and vegetables, combine with raw meat, may indeed be harmful to your health, but I insist that meat consumption is not the primary culprit for health issues in those following GBCs recommendations.
It seems to me that an important issue is that many don't follow his recommendations and eat some cooked or processed foods once in a way too.

But as GCB emphasized: “A substitute may well have harmful long-term effects, particularly at immune level, not only at the banal level of balance between the contributions of organs and muscle.”

...the proteins of mammals are closer to us than any other. They are our cousins in the family tree of evolution and are differentiated from us by much smaller number of mutations than birds, reptiles, fish, crustaceans or mollusks.

Proteins resembling those that our own body synthesizes can more easily induce our immune system into error. The work of our lymphocytes is precisely to distinguish self antigens (ours) from non-self antigens (foreign). That’s how bacteria, viruses, cancer cells and large molecules from outside (venoms, pollens, dust deposited on mucous membranes, etc.) are recognized. Regular penetration of food molecules most similar to antigens configurations it uses for this tracking work can obviously more easily mislead our immune system. Such confusion can either cause an attack on body cells bearing similar proteins, or to a failure to recognize foreign or abnormal elements. Thus, we can explain on one hand  autoimmune and allergic diseases, and on the other hand bacterial, viral and cancer diseases.

« Last Edit: March 18, 2014, 08:42:08 pm by Iguana »
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline Hanna

  • Shaman
  • *****
  • Posts: 424
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #218 on: March 18, 2014, 09:41:12 pm »
Oh, no, I don’t see this thread initiated by Hanna as a personal attack against meat based paleo diet. I felt it was rather intended as a personal attack against GCB and against me.

 l)

"Just because you're paranoid don't mean they're not after you."

Offline sabertooth

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,149
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #219 on: March 19, 2014, 07:01:48 am »
That’s a very difficult task that probably no one can perform reliably. If the animal has been really badly fed, then an abnormal flavor can be perceived in its meat by a thoroughly experienced person. Personally, I’m unable to tell. And if the animal has received medication, vaccinations or occasional heated or cooked supplements, even the best expert can’t perceive it. The only indication will be that some people will be more or less sick after consuming a sufficient amount. 

I can with some degree of certainty perceive the quality of the animal by taste. Having lived on a meat based diet that is very low in substances which would interfere with ones sense of taste, I have been able to hone my instincts. I have noticed that the first taste of blood and the liver are the best indication of the overall goodness of an animal, and to a lesser extent the kidneys.

Some animals will have bitter blood with an unpleasant aftertaste, and unsavory flavored liver. This will vary by degrees and must depend on a multitude of factors, but none the less I can tell, and if I do eat a poor tasting animal out of the necessity then I quickly loose my appetite and begin to feel bad. If the animal is pleasant in flavor I will notice a feeling of increased hunger and an overall sense of well being during the first few days after making the kill.

This good feeling upon finding a prime animal, drives me to seek out fresh blood and organs from the best sources available. Sometimes I get a poor animal, and if it is bad enough I have thrown out entire carcasses in the past. Some animals have lesions on their organs while others have bad looking kidneys, or mis-colored lymph nodes. There are a number of tale tale signs... visual, taste, texture which are good indicators of the animals well being.

The main criticism I have of GBC is the fact that he seems dogmatic in the way he advocates how one can attune their instincts to lead them to their optimal diet, then he goes on to claim that certain foods should be limited and that the instincto philosophy of eating however much you want of whatever ,natural whole foods taste good, does not apply to Meat.


Because an animal has a lot of fat, does it mean that it never received any processed food or medication? I doubt very much. 
Perhaps for sheep, but I don’t think it’s wise to eat mainly mutton regularly during several years. Better go for a variety of mostly wild animals, seafood, eggs, poultry, etc.
 

Unfortunately, It is up to the individual to discover for themselves the history of the animals they consume, just as they should find out what the farmer was putting into the soil that the produce was grown on. There is no other way for many people to guarantee premium quality.

It may not be wise to limit yourselves to one source of food entirely. I will still eat game meats like deer when available, the occasional sea food, and about 4 eggs a day. Also I have been expanding my variety of plant foods and will eat a large salad of mixed greens with avocado, tomato, green onions and some dried herb seasoning regularly.

Yes, I agree: it is often beneficial, specially during a certain period. But on the long run, it is highly recommended to have the broadest variety of meats, as much as possible from wild animals, and to alternate with non mammal meats and other sources of animal foods.   

This is debatable, there have been traditional herds peoples who have done fine on just one variety of meat, and there is no evidence that one has to eat non mammal meats. Though I think there may be some value in eating a variety of animals, I think quality trumps variety in this department. Its better to have a staple source of high quality meat than to eat a variety of animals from questionable sources.

Now if I was a wealthy man, I would be ordering pasture raised ostriches, kangaroo meat, deep sea fish, alligator, and any other creature under the sun, but because of my economic situation combine with the difficulty of locating quality animals, I have decided that its much safer to continue useing Mutton as my staple food.

Oh, no, I don’t see this thread initiated by Hanna as a personal attack against meat based paleo diet. I felt it was rather intended as a personal attack against GCB and against me. I agree there’s no proof, and as I wrote already, about all old timers instinctos including myself didn’t believe GCB’s explanations. But after reconsidering the issue with the infos available, including the ones posted by PaleoPhil, it seems factual that regular large consumption of red meat during long periods could be dangerous in the long term. 

There are many of us who like to attack GCBs dogmatic stance against heavy meat consumption, and again I must point out that in his hypothesis he doesn't not take into consideration people like A.V, the Inuit, and many other groups of people who are highly carnivorous and are able to maintain good health into old age. His recommendations do not apply to Low carb, high-meat eating mutants, who get 70 percent of their calories from fat.

Though I will agree that for people eating large amounts of carbs from fruits and starchy vegetables, while eating a small amount of animal fat, may not do very well if they eat large amounts of lean muscle meat.

There are just so many other factors involved for one to make blanket statements about how eating meat regularly is harmful to health

But as GCB emphasized: “A substitute may well have harmful long-term effects, particularly at immune level, not only at the banal level of balance between the contributions of organs and muscle.”

This too must be considered in context, and there are just too many other factors that are involved in maintaining a healthy balance to make these blanket statements.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 07:16:31 am by sabertooth »
A man who makes a beast of himself, forgets the pain of being a man.

Offline Iguana

  • Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: GCB: Eating meat too often could be harmful to health
« Reply #220 on: March 19, 2014, 03:59:24 pm »
Some animals have lesions on their organs while others have bad looking kidneys, or mis-colored lymph nodes. There are a number of tale tale signs... visual, taste, texture which are good indicators of the animals well being.
Having worked (or still working?) as a butcher gives you a clear advantage over almost all of us in this regard.

Quote
The main criticism I have of GBC is the fact that he seems dogmatic in the way he advocates how one can attune their instincts to lead them to their optimal diet, then he goes on to claim that certain foods should be limited and that the instincto philosophy of eating however much you want of whatever ,natural whole foods taste good, does not apply to Meat.
I doesn’t apply without any restriction not only to meat of farmed animals, but also particularly to cultivated fruits and in general to every food that can be too easily and regularly found due to technology and artificial conditions.  As he tried to explain here
“What constitutes instincotherapy is the rules one has to learn and comply with to re-establish an optimal operation of our alimentary instinct in artificial circumstances. It’s not the simple act to obey to our instinct, but to know how to decrypt what instinct we still have left and how to apply it in modern conditions. Unfortunately, the word “instinctotherapy” may have the drawback to refer exclusively to instinct without referring to any form of training, which can  perhaps be misleading.”

Quote
It may not be wise to limit yourselves to one source of food entirely. I will still eat game meats like deer when available, the occasional sea food, and about 4 eggs a day. Also I have been expanding my variety of plant foods and will eat a large salad of mixed greens with avocado, tomato, green onions and some dried herb seasoning regularly.
I appreciate that you will extend you food range, that can’t be a bad thing. But why do you decree beforehand that it will be for example about 4 eggs a day? It may well be too much, too often if it is every day or not enough if occasional. Most of all, in natural conditions it would never be so regular. You would find plenty eggs some days, but then no eggs for a long period. It would be the same for every food. And when you’ve got enough meat, you would not go in search for eggs — or conversely.

By mixing greens, you’ll easily eat too much of a kind and thus have an overload of some these infamous “antinutrients”. Better eat foods one by one, one after each other to feel properly their taste and reject those unsuitable for you or any excessive amount. 

Quote
This is debatable, there have been traditional herds peoples who have done fine on just one variety of meat, and there is no evidence that one has to eat non mammal meats. Though I think there may be some value in eating a variety of animals, I think quality trumps variety in this department. Its better to have a staple source of high quality meat than to eat a variety of animals from questionable sources.
We need both quality and variety. We have a past of cooked nutrition and thus we generally need a large choice to repair deficiencies or illnesses due to our previous bad diet. 

Quote
Now if I was a wealthy man, I would be ordering pasture raised ostriches, kangaroo meat, deep sea fish, alligator, and any other creature under the sun, but because of my economic situation combine with the difficulty of locating quality animals, I have decided that its much safer to continue useing Mutton as my staple food.
It may be fine for you for some more years, but you’ll have been warned that in the long run it’s much safer to have a more diversified choice.

Quote
There are many of us who like to attack GCBs dogmatic stance against heavy meat consumption, and again I must point out that in his hypothesis he doesn't not take into consideration people like A.V, the Inuit, and many other groups of people who are highly carnivorous and are able to maintain good health into old age.
Which many other groups, precisely? The Eskimos health and lifespan is not properly documented has having been so exceptional. Moreover, their meat was very different than beef or mutton. Saying that GCB has a dogmatic stance is in utter opposition with the reality. Did you read him properly? Of course, we are all free to ignore his advices based on his outstanding familiarity with biology, biochemistry, immunology, etc and his 50 years long experience not only with himself, but also by raising his 6 children and observing hundreds of other people and animals on a raw diet.

In French we say “the experience of others has never served anyone!” Too bad.
 
Wishing you all the best, you’re a great guy.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 04:14:35 pm by Iguana »
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline 24isours

  • Buffalo Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: GCB: Eating meat too often could be harmful to health
« Reply #221 on: March 19, 2014, 08:31:24 pm »
Quote
I appreciate that you will extend you food range, that can’t be a bad thing. But why do you decree beforehand that it will be for example about 4 eggs a day? It may well be too much, too often if it is every day or not enough if occasional. Most of all, in natural conditions it would never be so regular. You would find plenty eggs some days, but then no eggs for a long period. It would be the same for every food. And when you’ve got enough meat, you would not go in search for eggs — or conversely.

How can you make such claims about human history and it's previous natural conditions?

I would say humans evolved to be such great hunters because of their preference for eating meat. I'm pretty sure red meat was highly available during paleolithic times. I've mentioned the extinction of megafauna as well as the hunting of bison to near extinction. It seems humans have always found ways to manage a high intake of meat which could very well be the reason we continued to thrive throughout the different eras of history.

Quote
We need both quality and variety. We have a past of cooked nutrition and thus we generally need a large choice to repair deficiencies or illnesses due to our previous bad diet.

Didn't the Native Americans eat a majority of buffalo and were completely healthy? I'd have to agree with sabertooth about quality over variety. Every morning before my first meal I am excited about eating beef; the same meat I've been eating every day for three years.


Considering a condition "artificial" isn't instinctive in itself. We are the most advanced species on the earth for good reason. Perhaps our ability to seek out the best food sources throughout history and being able to continue to emulate previous thriving environments (farming) is in my opinion what makes us HUMAN.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 08:41:04 pm by 24isours »
3 Years on a Strictly Raw Ketogenic Carnivorous Diet.
*Currently still on a Ketogenic diet but have now incorporated raw vegetables.

Offline Iguana

  • Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: GCB: Eating meat too often could be harmful to health
« Reply #222 on: March 19, 2014, 09:48:15 pm »
 
How can you make such claims about human history and it's previous natural conditions?

I would say humans evolved to be such great hunters because of their preference for eating meat. I'm pretty sure red meat was highly available during paleolithic times. I've mentioned the extinction of megafauna as well as the hunting of bison to near extinction. It seems humans have always found ways to manage a high intake of meat which could very well be the reason we continued to thrive throughout the different eras of history.
I depends how far back in time you refer to. Availability of large animals meat is likely to have become commonplace only after our ancestors had developed hunting strategies, techniques and weapons, which is relatively recent on an evolutionary scale, just like or even posterior to the control of fire.

the Middle Paleolithic also saw an improvement of the tools themselves that allowed access to a wider variety and amount of food sources. For example microliths or small stone tools or points were invented around 70,000 or 65,000 BP and were essential to the invention of bows and spear throwers in the following Upper Paleolithic period.[28] Harpoons were invented and used for the first time during the late Middle Paleolithic (c.90,000 years ago); the invention of these devices brought fish into the human diets, which provided a hedge against starvation and a more abundant food supply.[32][33] Thanks to their technology and their advanced social structures, Paleolithic groups such as the Neanderthals who had a Middle Paleolithic level of technology, appear to have hunted large game just as well as Upper Paleolithic modern humans[34] and the Neanderthals in particular may have likewise hunted with projectile weapons.[35] Nonetheless, Neanderthal use of projectile weapons in hunting occurred very rarely (or perhaps never) and the Neanderthals hunted large game animals mostly by ambushing them and attacking them with mêlée weapons such as thrusting spears rather than attacking them from a distance with projectile weapons.[20][36]

During the Upper Paleolithic, further inventions were made, such as the net (c. 22,000 or 29,000 BP)[28] bolas,[37] the spear thrower (c.30,000 BP), the bow and arrow (c. 25,000 or 30,000 BP)


Quote
Didn't the Native Americans eat a majority of buffalo and were completely healthy? I'd have to agree with sabertooth about quality over variety.

They were decimated by infectious diseases brought by the Europeans and these Indians would probably haven’t been harmed by these if they were on properly balanced 100% raw diet.

Quote
Considering a condition "artificial" isn't instinctive in itself. We are the most advanced species on the earth for good reason. Perhaps our ability to seek out the best food sources throughout history and being able to continue to emulate previous thriving environments (farming) is in my opinion what makes us HUMAN.
Certainly the most advanced in technology and in destructive behavior. Farming is certainly one of the biggest mistake in the human race history, as Jared Diamond wrote. As already explained, “instinctive nutrition” is not equivalent “general instinctive behavior” and moreover we obviously don’t rely exclusively on our instinct for nutrition.   
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #223 on: March 19, 2014, 10:02:10 pm »
Given the vast migrating herds of beats in palaeo times, humans would have had plentiful access to raw meats throughout the palaeolithic era just by scavenging, with no need to hunt.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline Inger

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
  • Gender: Female
  • 38 yo Norwegian RVAF s.-06, 90% carniv.
    • View Profile
Re: GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health
« Reply #224 on: March 19, 2014, 10:38:57 pm »
I depends how far back in time you refer to. Availability of large animals meat is likely to have become commonplace only after our ancestors had developed hunting strategies, techniques and weapons, which is relatively recent on an evolutionary scale, just like or even posterior to the control of fire.

We are way better adapted to eat large animals and even "cultivated"ones like sheep, beef etc that have been around for long, than eating the cultivated Agri products you find in shops today. It is pretty clear by now what fructose does to our health. And how dangerous it can be to go vegan.

It is very easy to catch fish and mussels/oysters, crabs... for much of that you do not need anything else than your hands...

Quote
Quote
Didn't the Native Americans eat a majority of buffalo and were completely healthy? I'd have to agree with sabertooth about quality over variety.


They were decimated by infectious diseases brought by the Europeans and these Indians would probably haven’t been harmed by these if they were on properly balanced 100% raw diet.

We all know how dangerous foreign viruses and bacterias can be for native populations. It has nothing to do with them eating a not optimal diet. They are just so totally not adapted to stuff from another continent. Like we also would easily get issues in Africa's Jungle without having modern medicine. I have heard about instincto's dying from malaria down there....
That said, I have read the white man also gave the Indian's alcohol and other stuff that must have made them more sensible to disease too.

What I have read about the American Indians, they were just stunningly healthy and strong, their wounds healed so fast the white man was shocked.
From what I know today, this fact does not surprise me at all.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2014, 02:47:08 am by Iguana »

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk