He did mention fish/white meat, however he was making the point that meats aren't what is making them healthy - the Mediterraneans are healthy despite these animal foods. They are healthy because of the large intake of whole plant foods, as is the case in Japan.

And we know this, because within Japan itself there's a clear relationship between health, and amount of animal products consumed. The traditional Okinawan diet (the place which has the most centenarians int he world) is just 6% calories from animal products, the rest being from sweet potato and rice and veg. Where as mainland Japan where they eat more animal products they don't do as well as their Okinawan neighbors.

This relationship of animal food intake & rates of chronic diseases works on a local level or a global level. Less is always better, all the way to none (Loma Linda 7th day Adventists many of which are vegan by religion tend do the best out of all of the blue zones, when it comes to chronic disease).



------


Omega 3 is present in so many plant foods - such as flaxseed/linseed, hemp, chia, and even sea algae (which is where the fish get their omega 3 from)

The benefit of getting omega 3 from plant sources means almost no saturated fat, no cholesterol, no mercury, no IGF-1 raising protein structures (and no antibiotics if you are eating farmed fish). Also they say the ocean will be fishless by 2048..... (which also coincides with the Post Atomic Horror era for the Trekkies out there lol)

Fish also don't have any fiber, (the one macro nutrient everyone pretends doesn't exist, and most people are deficient in). Stay regular and prevent diverticulitis/diverticulitis, and avoid hemorrhoids, and even varicose veins.

Flax also contains lignans which prevents/treats prostate cancer https://www.healthline.com/health/prostate-cancer/flaxseed-and-prostate-cancer.


You just get so much more nutrition out of plants over all. Animal products tend to have a higher amount of a single compound or nutrient, but they have a lot of baggage with it. It's like buying a car, you don't necessarily want the one with the biggest engine, the total package is what's important.


------

Whether or not Barnard is a vegan shill, doesn't change the nutritional profiles of foods as shown above.

It also doesn't change the fact he looks, acts and speaks amazing for someone that's 65 years old - clearly putting his theory into practice with wonderful results. And while that is anecdotal, that's certainly something nobody would say about Atkins, or Loran Cordain (Paleo advocate) or Jimmy Moore (Keto advocate), who all look like they could drop dead any minute (and Atkins literally did drop dead).

Actually no, I responded to what you said, which could be taken to mean many things.
I said I thought you meant the current state of Iraq when you said "blaming Sr. for Iraq"...and reading this it seems I was correct.
Imo, the current state or the region is mostly due to jr, not Sr.
Many people still blame Sr for the current state there. I disagree with that theory. That's all.

Sr hardly had a war in Iraq, his barely crossed the border and was mainly in Kuwait if memory serves. They chased the Iraqis out and bombed the shit out of them as they ran.
Kuwait was considered a sovereign nation, not a province of Iraq. Saddam invaded it. Sr never tried to remove Saddam, except from Kuwait. Since he understood the problem of creating a power vacuum there, I think leaving Saddam in power was smart with no feasible plan to replace him, even though it was clearly inhumane....and we have evidence now to support that. Iraq is absolutely worse off today than it was under Saddam, no matter which group you belong to.

Fortunately, all the WMD talk was pure fabricated fantasy...we never had evidence he continued those programs after the first gulf war/Kuwait. If he had had them, Bush Jr might have started ww3 by attacking him, knowing he would use them on his neighbors like he had before. Remember, it was Jr's administration's plan to convince the public he had wmds, so it's no surprise he also had people saying they're too dangerous to attack while he had many more saying he's too dangerous to leave in power....the same people claiming he was involved in 9/11, which was asinine.

If the asshat Hunter had died, yeah, I would vote to allow it.
No human died, so it's not snuff.

I hate people who hunt with dogs. They never show any concern for their animals. My neighbor hunted bears with a dog pack....he seemed to lose a few dogs a year and severely injured more, and he never cared a bit.

Squirrels are stupidly determined little fuckers when it comes to nuts.

I used to have a bar fridge out on my patio and one day, I threw a bag of peanuts into it because it seemed like a good idea at the time. Anyway, the next day I came out onto the patio and the fridge door was open and the nuts were gone. The little bastards actually chewed through the soft magnetic strip holding the door closed and managed to get the door open and abscond with my hard-earned nuts.

I got even, 'tho -- kinda.

On the corner of our block, we had this big green thing that was a cover for some pretty high voltage stuff underneath. I threw some peanuts under the gap between the cover and the ground and waited. Sure's shit, here comes one cocky fucking squirrel lookin' to score my nuts. Under the cover he goes then --FLASH!! -- BOOM!! -- victory over squirrels! Only he took the power out for the entire block and the surge fried my brand-new Pentium Pro computer. Oh, and one of my neighbors narced me off to PG&E who were none-too-happy with my brilliantly-laid trap and my erstwhile vengeance over genus Sciurus.

I know a lot of people would ask me, "Well, what did you learn from all this?", to which I'd reply, "Not a damned thing."

It doesn't work because there is an intrinsic group think personality in the Nordic region. Most people in that region that were born and raised there are very sensitive to profit making and ostentatious displays.

Which means that people are glad to simply 'get by'. There is not a mass drive to be better than your neighbor or own more toys than them. Of course there are outliers, but the bulk of Scandinavians are very used to the accepted norm. They are more willing to accept massive tax rates because they know they will be taken care of by the government. They aren't necessarily concerned about 'getting rich'.

Contrast that to other areas, especially the USA, and you will find out that it would never work here because we are an individualistic nation. Even the bluest liberal wants to be rich here. It's more cutthroat, more selfish, than you will find in a Scandi nation.

Another huge reason it would never work is that they do not spend anywhere near the percentage of their budget on defense that we do. Denmark spends about 20 billion per year on defense. Norway, an oil rich Scandi nation that is considered one of our most important NATO allies, spends about 6 billion. Less than 1.2% of their GDP. This is one thing that Trump was actually right about. We spend around 700 Billion, roughly 3.5% of our current GDP.

"Half the alliance — 16 of the 29 countries — don’t even spend 1.5 percent (of gross domestic product) let alone 2 percent that we all agreed on four years ago (at a NATO summit) in Wales,” Michael Fallon, who served as secretary of state for defense from 2014 to 2017, said. In 2017, only the U.K., Greece, Poland and Estonia reached the 2 percent target.

Whether that level of spending is needed is another argument altogether. I personally think we overspend way too much on defense, but regardless it is a huge factor as to why we can't offer the same level of 'socialism' that the Nordic nations do. If we spent the same percentage as Norway, we would be saving close to 460 billion dollars a year that could be applied to other programs. Such as paying for college for qualified students or trade school for ones that are not college minded. Or providing benefits to new mothers that we currently don't.

Yes, and imo any reasonable person would have done exactly that instead of intentionally causing an incident he could film and maybe profit from, or at least get some world star views.

She's married to a black dude, so I'll go out on a limb and say she isn't afraid of black men more than other men.

Of course, there's the possibility that she's actually a captive of her husband, forced against her will to marry and live with someone she feared and didn't respect because of their skin color just to torture her because she's really a racist bitch, but I seriously doubt it.

If the answer is yes, she's done this before to white guys they just didn't film it to publicly shame her and instead just used their fob again like a reasonable neighbor, would you change your position?

No, he has no obligation beyond the building's written rules to engage her at all, but that's exactly why she was suspicious, he violated building rules and stupidly refused to be reasonable....whatever his reason might have been, likely a mistaken assumption she was racially motivated and not just a good neighbor looking out for the safety of her building as the management had repeatedly requested everyone living there do.

What do you think he would do if a few 6'6" skinheads barged in when he opened the door, shoved past him, and rudely refused to prove they belonged there while filming him, snidely commenting about the dumb black boy who thinks he's security? Would you then excuse the hundreds of death threats he started getting from random racists for daring to confront white men? I hope not.

It is in that building, according to the management. They asked everyone living there to never allow strangers in who don't use their key fob, and he didn't.
He was in the wrong, doubly so for labeling her a racist for being a good concerned neighbor.
I hope the next person barging into the building isn't stopped and robs his ass blind.

This is not her job to check. Being a busy body neighbor is not her job.

She is in the wrong.

As I thought, one more instance of a white woman following the rules by asking a black man to follow the fucking rules, and so she's labeled a racist.....who's married to an African American. *facepalm

The man pushed his way into the secure building as she opened the door for her dog and refused to tell her which apartment he lived in or demonstrate that he had a key to the building. He knew that was the procedure requested by the building owners/managers, he got the same emails requesting no one allow any stranger into the secure building that she did, but he refused to follow procedure.
What's more, he decided to publicly shame her over attempting to follow posted safety procedures and building rules because he's racist. Guaranteed he would not have recorded and publicized this if she were black doing exactly the same thing, and news outlets wouldn't air it if he did, but because she's white, game on.

Now, for properly following the building rules, she's fired, ostracized, and getting multiple death threats daily. That's outrageous. He should have the same consequences, as the actual racist in this situation.

Bbq where it's not allowed and rudely refuse to move to where it is allowed, I'll call the cops. Loudly hawk water under my window all day without a permit and rudely refuse to move, I'll call the cops. Push into my secure building and act like a rude intruder instead of my new neighbor, I'll call the cops. I don't give one single fuck what color your skin is.....this bullshit that a white person"snitching" on a black person (who is violating the posted rules/law and being a rude asshole about it) is reason to call them racists is just that, bullshit.
Call me a racist now, because dark skin won't protect you from having to follow the rules and law or be stopped/ reported around me any more or less than pink, yellow, tan, red, or any other color skin would.
Downvote spreading this narrative that whites must ignore the rude illegal actions of non whites or be labeled racist. Fuck that, homie don't play dat.

It seems when Apollo Mission Astronaut, Neil Armstrong first walked on the moon, he not only gave his famous "One Small Step for Man, One Giant Leap for Mankind" statement, but followed it by several remarks - usual com traffic between him, the other astronauts and Mission Control.

Before he reentered the lander, he made the enigmatic remark, "Good luck, Mr. Gorsky." Many people at NASA thought it was a casual remark concerning some rival Soviet Cosmonaut, however, upon checking, there was no Gorsky in either the Russian nor American space programs.

Over the years many people have questioned him as to what the "Good luck, Mr. Gorsky" statement meant.

A few months ago, (July 5th, 1995, Tampa Bay FL) while answering questions following a speech, a reporter brought up the 26 year old question to Armstrong. He finally responded. It seems that Mr. Gorsky had finally died and so Neil Armstrong felt he could answer the question.

When he was a kid, he was playing baseball with his brother in the backyard. His brother hit a fly ball which landed in front of his neighbors' bedroom window. His neighbors were Mr and Mrs. Gorksy. As he leaned down to pick it up, he heard Mrs. Gorsky shouting at Mr. Gorsky. "Oral sex, oral sex you want? You'll get oral sex when the kid next door walks on the moon!"

-------------------------------------------

if you snope, you a dope. it a joke.

So much better than hounds baying.
(My neighbor has a puppy mill for hunting hounds, it's insane)

True, assuming it's parent recording the video. If it's an aunt or uncle or neighbor who's been railroaded into babysitting, all bets are off.

*music

I hope these neighbors hang out closer often!

Really? Jimmy Carter said that?!

Seriously, please quote where in the bible Jesus said any such thing. I think you're misquoting the holiness code for Jews from Leviticus and attributing them to Jesus. Those same rules disallow cotton poly blends and shellfish, but you probably never considered boycotting Red Lobster or the Gap, and allow slaves from neighboring countries but you probably don't have a Canadian house slave. Learn about the difference between Christian and Jewish laws don't just watch fake news. ;-)

Really, Bob, you want to say banging kids is liberal after Republicans supported Roy Moore?! Lol. *facepalm
Looting and other crime is not a liberal idea, that's nonsense. Bat shit crazy, hyper partisan nonsense. Some liberals want it to be so easy to cross borders legally that illegal immigrants would cease to exist, I've never heard a sane one support illegal immigration, only illegal immigrants.
Crime could more reasonably be said to be a religious thing, atheists are vastly underrepresented in prison populations. You might say atheists are statistically far less likely to be missing out on life.

No actual science has ever pointed to a creator God....or any god. Anyone telling you different is lying to you about what science is. The closest science ever comes to saying "...so there must be a God" is when it says "we don't know" to a question, often followed by unraveling the mystery and never by finding God hiding behind a corner.

Christians have a much longer and more storied history of ruthless torture and murder in the name of faith than Muslims. Their motto is also convert or die. Learn about them before attempting to make comparisons, maybe?

Obedience to the law like the recently pardoned terrorist group, the Bundys, practiced? Obedience to the law like the bakers allowed by law to display their intolerance against whomever they deem unclean? Obedience to the law like Trump, who's been found guilty of multiple frauds....admitted them in fact? Obedience to the law only when it's convenient or self serving, intolerance whenever it can be gotten away with is what the right practices today.
Maybe you're still a kid who has yet to take critical thinking classes? ;-)

Really? WE sponsored a VIOLENT coup? So you take the purely Russian viewpoint.
Wiki-
After the breakup of the Soviet Union, Ukraine endured years of corruption, mismanagement, lack of economic growth, currency devaluation, and problems in securing funding from public markets.[38][39] Successive Ukrainian governments in the 2000s sought a closer relationship with the European Union (EU).[40][41] One of the measures meant to achieve this was an association agreement with the European Union, which would have provided Ukraine with funds in return for liberalising reforms. President Yanukovych announced his intention to sign the agreement, but ultimately refused to do so at the last minute. This sparked a wave of protests called the "Euromaidan" movement. During these protests Yanukovych signed a treaty and multibillion-dollar loan with Russia. The Ukrainian security forces cracked down on the protesters, further inflaming the situation and resulting in a series of violent clashes in the streets of Kiev. As tensions rose, Yanukovych fled to Russia and did not return.[44]

Russia refused to recognize the new interim government, calling the overthrow of Yanukovych a coup d'état, and began a military intervention in Ukraine. The newly appointed interim government of Ukraine signed the EU association agreement and agreed to reform the country's judiciary and political systems, as well as its financial and economic policies. The International Monetary Fund pledged more than $18 billion in loans contingent on Ukraine's adopting those reforms. The revolution was followed by pro-Russian unrest in some south-eastern regions, a standoff with Russia regarding the annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol, and a war between the Ukrainian government and Russia-backed separatists in the Donbass.



The thing to remember about Crimea is it WASN'T PART OF RUSSIA, so no it didn't hold Russia's only black sea port not ice blocked in winter, it held a Ukrainian port Russia LEASED for use by it's black sea fleet from the Ukraine.
It's utter bullshit that Russia found a democratic way to invade and annex Crimea, they militarily invaded, seized and dissolved the democratically elected government by force, created and installed a new pro Russian sham government, then IT signed fake illegal treaties with Russia in violation of international laws and multiple binding treaties.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

Russian masked troops invade and occupy key Crimean locations, including airports and military bases, following Putin's orders.[2][3]
The head of Ukrainian Navy, Admiral Berezovsky, defects, followed later by half of the Ukrainian military stationed in the region.[4][5][6]
Russian forces seize the Supreme Council (Crimean parliament). The Council of Ministers of Crimea is dissolved and a new pro-Russian Prime Minister installed.[7][8]
The new Supreme Council declares the Republic of Crimea to be an independent, self-governing entity, then holds a referendum on the status of Crimea on 16 March, which results in a majority vote to join the Russian Federation.[9]
Treaty signed between the Republic of Crimea and the Russian Federation at the Kremlin on 18 March to formally initiate Crimea's accession to the Russian Federation.[10]
The Ukrainian Armed Forces are evicted from their bases on 19 March by Crimean protesters and Russian troops. Ukraine subsequently announces the withdrawal of its forces from Crimea.[11]
Russia suspended from G8.[12]
International sanctions introduced on Russia.

You sound distinctly Soviet or ridiculously ignorant in your misrepresentation of the situation. They militarily attacked, invaded, and seized their neighbor, so not a bit restrained, they were not invited in by the government and welcomed....or would you insist they are also exceptionally restrained for not attacking and retaking Anchorage Alaska, their only non winter ice bound port in North America, a port clearly more strategically important than Sebastopol and just as Russian?