/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>12922241
>Antinutrients

Just eat some goddamn lettuce and stop fagging up the board retard

>believing in anti-nutrients
kys retard

>>12922241
>because ive been told that i should cut plants out of my diet completely due to them

who told you this

>>12922259
They exist though. It is scientifically evident. But the question is TO WHAT EXTENT do they actually harm our bodies?
>>12922258
You didn't read my entire post did you? I am skeptical of the 'antinutrient' scare.

>>12922266
>They exist though. It is scientifically evident

No they don't. Know it isn't. There is no concept in medicine as an "antinutrient"

>>12922274
Okay, then what are the negative effects of things like L-canavanine, hemaglutinine, protease inhibitors and tannins called in medicine? In plenty of other scientific disciplines including veterinary science they are called 'anti-nutritional factors' or even just 'anti-nutrients'.

>>12922274
For example from "Important antinutrients in plant feedstuffs for aquaculture: an update on recent findings regarding responses in salmonids" by Krogdahl et al.

>Antinutrients are defined as endogenous compounds in feedstuffs that may reduce feed intake, growth, nutrient digestibility and utilization, affect the function of internal organs or alter disease resistance. In plant feedstuffs, these include structural components such as fibres, components storing nutrients and energy such as phosphorous‐rich phytic acid and α‐galactoside oligosaccharides, allergens and various inherent chemical defences against being eaten.

Is this all wrong? Can you please cite a reference or a literature review debunking the negative effects of these compounds that dont have a name?

>>12922261
>who told you this
Some random faggots on online forums, as well as a few bullshit health blogs that are spreading the 'eat only animal products' fad.

I see some studies on chemistry citing these folks, but those studies are a bit old (pic related). Are there any newer studies that show anti-nutrients (or whatever they are called) having an impact on human health?

>>12922274
Is this all false, or was your argument entirely hinged on the semantics of calling them 'anti-nutrients'?

>>12922241
Why would we evolve to have trouble absorbing nutrients because of eating food?

>>12922413
We didn't evolve to have trouble absorbing nutrients, but plants have evolved defenses in attempts to stop animals from eating them. Evolution doesn't create perfect organisms. It creates organisms by chance that happen to be more efficient than previous generations to survive and reproduce.

Is this what anti-vax moms and flat earthers came up with after being BTFO countless times?

>>12922487
which thing, the antinutrients or the meat-only diet?

Jesus, is a single person on /ck/ interested in the literature or have a single sliver of interest in academia? Not a single citation, just short shitty replies with nothing of interest in them. At least /an/ has a couple of academics.

>>12922241
Just fucking eat like a normal human being you dumb fucking seething faggot virgin pussy bitchy cunt. Dilate.

>>12922241
Eating plants is not horrible, just select what to eat.

I recommend NOT eating brown rice, brown bread and other things made with whole grains because the phytic acid in the bran protects the phosphorus in the grains from being absorbed and also binds with other minerals such as calcium, zinc, iron, etc, and makes their abortion difficult as well even if the source is other foods.

Beans and other legumes have tons of it, but soaking overnight and boiling for 15 minutes is enough to diminish the harm. Slow cooking beans, however, does NOTHING.

Here's a good overview on them: https://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/vegetarianism-and-plant-foods/living-with-phytic-acid/

>>12922241
>Plants have anti nutrients
>Plants have regular nutrients
>Plants have more nutrients than anti nutrients
Really gets the old noggin joggin

>>12922241
I think I read a while ago that it's not really a concern for people with balanced and varied diets, and like you said, they might even have some health benefits by keeping cholesterol at healthy levels and preventing some kinds of cancer. It only really seems to be a concern in poorer countries where a lot of people might only have rice and lentils to eat, so dealing with the phytic acid for them would help prevent some malnutrition problems.

>>12922241
Not everything in meat is good for you, either. Just eat a balanced, varied diet and you'll be fine.

>>12922509
seconding this

If you want to get around the paywall email the authors of the paper, they can send you copies for free if you ask.

>>12922487
There's a small faction of low carbers who think a raw meat or all meat diet is the healthiest. I remember reading some "carnivore" forums and there was a dude who fed his kids nothing but pemmican. They looked healthy but one of the boys had so much baby fat on him it was surreal.

>>12922241
Nothing wrong with eating plants and lots of specific nutrients don't come from just an all animal diet, I imagine. Lots of traditional medicine and at home solutions to health problems are plant only. Vegans are fucked just like carnists are fucked. You lose health options by reducing your diet. As has been talked about to death, vegans lose taurine, b vitamins amino acids and cholesterol. Each of those losses has a myriad of counterarguments that are all retarded.

>>12922259
google search why you dont drink distilled water dipfuck shitdick cockheaded fagtard

>>12924296
>lots of specific nutrients don't come from just an all animal diet
Name them, I can only think of Vitamin C.

>>12924314
I said I imagine, I don't know them. I'm a believer in the health benefits of things like clove oil and rosemary, which have chemicals and things in it not considered nutrients. Antioxidants and things like that. Anti bacterial effects of tea tree oil.

>>12922241
do you have a link to any studies from reputable sources that mention anti-nutrients?

>>12922274
What?
Literally just go on PubMed and search "anti nutrient"

>>12924325
>he fell for the olive oil meme
olive oil kills your artery function

https://youtu.be/A4WD8Bm7s_I

>>12924356
where in his post does he mention olive oil?

>>12924325
Antioxidants /are/ nutrients. Anything which is used by your body's processes or is broken down into things which are is a nutrient. The only things that I'm aware of that are 'good for you' which aren't nutrients are soluble fiber and probiotic cultures, and the former is dubious.

>>12924356
I eat olive oil daily and have read plenty of information that I trust that makes it healthy. But I'll take another pepe reaction. From what I understand fats are not bad at all and you can't have too much if you're eating a diet that supports their intake. Generally speaking it's less carbs.

>>12924375
I dont think the FDA or other 'reputable' sources that anons would link consider antioxidants nutrients. Almost any scientific paper posted or shared these days is fraud, you can trust very little. Most studies are funded and performed to make people take on harmful diets.

It doesn't matter what people on the internet say, it's proven fact that you feel better when you eat a wide variety of veggies

>>12922241
>And if eating plants was so horrible, wouldn't people/lineages who eat lots of plants be dead or have faced evolutionary dead-ends already?

Consider finishing high school.

>>12924286
Isn’t an all meat diet the guaranteed way to increase risk of cancer? Like that’s how the study that said red meat contributes to colon cancer determinate that?

>>12925341
You can find studies for just about anything showing it both causes and prevents cancer. The only "guaranteed" way to get cancer is ionizing radiation.

>>12923839
>Here's a good overview on them: https://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/vegetarianism-and-plant-foods/living-with-phytic-acid/
Pic related was a really stupid thing for the author to include in his article. Why? Because phytic acid is found in plant foods and DOGS ARE CARNIVORES, SO OF COURSE THEY AREN'T GOING TO HANDLE THE PHYTIC ACID WELL. It's like saying that we shouldn't eat chocolate because it kill dogs. This is the same kind of junk science that was used to scare people away from eating foods high in cholesterol.

I'm still reading through the article but this is one hang-up I've found so far.

>>12925726
>DOGS ARE CARNIVORES
Wolves are carnivores, dogs have become slightly omnivorous compared to their ancestors, likely due to their interaction with humans, adapting to be able to eat the starches that made up early civilized man's diet.

Inferring human results purely on dog studies is still dumb, pigs would probably be a much better model organism, I just wanted to share.

>>12925789
Wouldn’t primate models be ideal?

>>12926054
Depends, gorillas, for example, are herbivores, so they would be right out. Chimps and bonobos are close enough to us to where it would start to become enough of an ethical dilemma to not bother. Not sure about orangutans. I chose pigs because they are omnivorous like are, but they just below the line of intelligence where I can't look the other way when people start killing them.

Anti nutrients are a legit concern when eating large quantities of raw plants. Obviously, if you cook your plant based foods, they become more digestible. You'd have to go out of your way & eat a pretty strange diet to even make anti nutrients a problem.

>>12924314
Even vitamin c is in animals, that being raw animal fat from marine mammals.

>>12924339
Op has linked plenty in the first 10 or so posts.

>>12924440
Sounds like you trust health blogs more than the scientific literature.

>>12926054
No, because doing research on chimps will bring on the ire of animal rights terrorists. Mice and pigs are good enough.

>>12926279
I wonder how the raw plant diet fad became a thing when it did.

>>12926360
>accurate endocrine data
>angry tards
I don’t see a downside

>>12926279
Anti nutrients don't exist

>>12926369
Some vegans thought regular veganism was getting too mainstream for their tastes.

>>12927145
Funny while being 100% true..

>>12922241
>wouldn't people/lineages who eat lots of plants be dead or have faced evolutionary dead-ends already?

Well, let's see:

>Race that always ate the most meat: White
>Race whose diet is entirely or almost entirely plant based: Indian

Guess who's still wiping his ass with his hand?

>inb4 indian is not a race, you know what I mean

>>12924296
http://www.durastill.com/documents/myths_distilled_water.pdf

Cuck.

>>12922261
I did!

>>12922241
I've done a lot of research into this anon. "Antinutrient" is kind of a stupid buzzword though. I could dump a lot of info, but I'll keep it short. Don't cut dark leafy greens out of your diet or small amounts of fruits. The benefits outweigh overall negatives. Focus on variety and a healthy balance.

The problem is with grains, beans, seeds, and nuts. Especially eaten with foods you are trying to get the nutrients from. Phytic acid is one of the big concerns, which promotes mineral deficiency. I don't believe in that keto or paleo shit, but imagine living in the wild before civilization. How rare would it be to find a potato, or rice, or oats. Some food wouldn't even be on your side of the continent. The western diet is heavily reliant on grains especially: bread, flour, rice, etc. as well as high calories, sugar, and acidity. Don't get too paranoid though, if you eat a healthy and balanced diet you should be okay.

>>12927827
What if I like to eat a ton of spinach? Like 4-8 packed cups a day, along with other fruits and vegetables obviously

>>12928942
>What if I like to eat a ton of spinach?
Settled down there, Popeye.

>>12922241
Most of my health issues cleared up going meat based.
There's something to the carnivore diet but people are close minded

>>12928942
Kidney stones from the oxalates.

>>12928942
That’s fine though you’d probably want to cut back, or cooking/soaking in water will help neutralize the acid at least. You’d probably want to go for kale or collard greens if you want a more beneficial vege. I think the average person only needs 3-4 servings of veges per day though.

A reason for deficiency is people aren’t eating the mineral dense meats like organs, or aren’t intaking enough fat with fat soluble vitamins for example. Another thing is foods with enzyme and nutrient inhibitors should be eaten isolated rather than with the meals you’re trying to get nutrients from. You can eat like almonds in between meals and it shouldn’t impact absorption too much given enough time. Another problem is say getting enough vitamin D or vitamin k2 which are needed to absorb certain minerals. You could always try to supplement but be aware of what you’re taking and what amounts. The body doesn’t absorb synthetics as well as food based nutrients, but certain ones aren’t readily available so it’s your best option.