Schizophonia

You troll lol but actually i've never seen a video like that with bean bowls. It says a lot on what foods we really evolved around and therefore developed neurological patterns associated with it in the reward circuit.

You don't need b12, zinc, choline, lechitin, O3 or fat soluble vitamins at all if you regularly eat fish and meat that's the point. Eggs and some organs are from far the biggest source of choline of any food. Oyster the biggest source of zinc, even iodine with some algae, of any food. Liver the biggest source of copper and vitamine A, and the most nutritionally dense of any food on the world. Fish the only important source of EPA and DHA, and one of the single most important sources of iodine for most people. Meat is the greatest source of hemic iron (the only form that is sufficiently assimilable to reverse a deficiency unless consumed with calcium, in reality), selenium, zinc, b12, b6 and B3 (niacin); it contains all the nutrients in sufficient quantity (even vitamin C, carnivores do not get scurvy) and is a satisfying source to eat and rich in calories and protein. Despite the inflation that makes muscle meat more expensive nowadays, very interesting foods such as chicken pieces with skin, fresh sardines, heart and offal of beef are therefore always accessible and interesting. Milk also is very nutritious if you tolerate it. Maybe too much calcium if you already lake iron.

Hi homie. If you have an objection you can go into details and enlighten us with your light. The equivalent of 100g weighed raw of any legume is already heavy to eat and digest knowing that it is only about 350kcal, probably less given the assimilation. If you need even "only" 2500kcal per day you understand quicky you cannot count on beans; You must count on denser calories sources.

He must be talking about the "small" 100/120g sticks. Butter is the fat with the best taste.

Yum. When a non-French (or Chinese, Italian, Thai...) person rates a meal, you have to remove 3 points out of 10 ; 5 if it's an anglo-saxon/ So in your case, you have to understand that this soup is ok. My theorem is infallible, don't bother looking

Veganism is cheaper if you eat a horrible slave diet of rice, beans, and supplements. If you want to be healthy and still enjoy yourself you have to replace beans with tofu/tempeh or protein powder, eat most of your carbs in the form of pasta, bananas or dates, and eat lots of nuts. This is what makes veganism "expensive". When you are an omnivore you can get chicken pieces with skin for a few euros and you have a good amount of protein, fat, calories in general and nutrients some of which are only found in good proportions in meat. Even better fish. And that's it.

It's essentially cherry piking and falsification. The countries that eat the most meat are 1) those where people are physically tallest 2) those where people have the greatest life expectancy.

Mediterranean diet is full of seafood, meat and dairy products from sheep and to a lesser extent goats.

Nevermind.

Yes 👍 @RendHeaven I will take the time to respond well this week-end.

Psychoanalytic diagnosis of op's level of socialfall-ism.

Yes your boiled beans are disgusting to eat, are not very nutritious and are indigestible. It is impossible to count on beans unless you have the energy intake of a 5 year old. You're just hurting yourself. It's extremely holistic. If you have another system then you can explain it to us. 👍

The population with the highest life expectancy (Hong Kong, Japan, France, Switzerland, Australia, etc.) are also those who eat the most meat and animal products in general.

You will develop intestinal problems and deficiencies if you rely primarily on beans, 100% guaranteed It's also disgusting. They are also smaller and have lower IQ.

No, it don't. You can eventually say it's a more or less holistic pov from one of the four quadrants of ken wilber.

I didn't read op post before my response. I take back what i said.

I read the topic, no it wouldn't work it's too much.

You have the right to want to be jealous, just like you have the right to want to be girly in general.

I see.

How things are going ?

Yes, it's on the conclusion to have we're disagree. It's not only a difference we do between different species but also between humans : You don't treat your mother the same way you treat a random 50yo woman, and you don't treat a non attractive girl the same way you treat an attractive girl. Why ? Nothing it's there for your survival or not, it's a purely adaptive process. Animals are used for their meat, eggs, milk, and possibly their labor; all animals do that. You don't have neither, the only real fundamental reason why we don't treat you like an animal is because as a human you are part of the community and have a power relationship that an animal does not have; An animal does not pay taxes and cannot conspire against its employer. You can't do anything against another human being and to protect your own interest you will wish for yourself a society with justice, but a justice that secures cohabitation with potentially threatening factors, that is to say other humans! Not animals. Life is a power relationship between libidinal forces, no matter how much you feel the need to protect your ego by drowning this phenomenon in additional layers of concepts like veganism, humanism, egalitarianism or whatever. It is actually you who is the most self-centered in this story; you live in the split, negatively connote the object according to ideological and abstract criteria in order to be able to identify yourself in fine with the good, turning the camera towards yourself and congratulating yourself is the way in which you are encouraged to enjoy in this context. In my position, there is no narcissism at all, just hovering desires projected on external objects. The less selfish a desire is, the more regressive and narcissistic it is in fact.

Because dogs are used as pets, we have been neurologically and psychologically conditioned to see them as such. Pasture animals have no other use than to be eaten. In fact, some animals that are selected to be pets, such as dogs or cats, are sometimes still eaten in some places in the world.

In reality, as the anti-black pill are in fact mentally blackpilled in denial and in mirror with those who identify with it, the anti-vegans are mentally vegans in denial, and who project their regression. It's all a question of context, how the split of the self is made; On one side hysterical vegans who suddenly become phallic for example in politics (liberals), and on the other anti-vegans (phallic here) but let themselves go to their defense mechanism in politics and become hysterical conservatives ruminating on the blackpill or whatever. In the end, the vegan/non-vegan battles are essentially a game of mirrors where neurotics throw their poop in each other's faces, a big poop fight. It's not about being vegan, omnivorous or carnivorous, it's not about diet; it's about identification and libidinal transference onto diet.

Ps : Aggression comes from the pleasure of hurting the signifier on which the castration anxiety is projected. It is a mechanism inherited from the anal sadistic stage, where Freud noticed that children could obtain power and differentiate themselves (build their ego !) by refusing to shit where they should and shitting where they shouldn't.

Something (Oedipus complex, trauma, authoritarian education, modern comfort...) happened in such a way that the psyche developed around a significant castration anxiety (fear of being destroyed, amputated, humiliated...). As the post-phallic phase libido generates castration anxiety, it is diverted towards lower but effective schemes so that the psyche can function in the direction of pleasure. To speak very concretely, this means that instead of essentially enjoying through sex, food, sport and "normal" things, you will behave more like a psychotic person and invest your libido in imaginary signifiers and in general imaginary games, far from the principle of reality ; Hygiene, politics, personal development, spirituality, humanitarianism, all these are fields of activity rich in neurotic people. We are all more or less in "regressive psychosis", in the imaginary, otherwise we would all basically be psychopaths but an overinvestment in the imaginary indeed generates very "idealistic" people (vegans, religious, political activists) generally with "paradoxically" a aggressiveness because the phalic desire ("egoistic") is transferred, projected because repressed by the anxiety of castration. One thing that must be understood is that the egoistic/altruistic split and the split of the object in general is an illusion, the nervous system is nothing but logical, rational when it comes to guaranteeing its survival. It is in fact a defense mechanism that allows one to project one's castration anxiety onto the other. But fundamentally there is only selfishness, the real divide is "objective" and dichotomises phallic people, especially men (money, sex, cars, watches, love, manual work, passion...), and people who prefer to enjoy themselves more via regressive schemata. This is why you can turn a vegan into a meat eater, an anti-racist into a racist, make a religious person abandon his religion etc. with enough xanax or alcohol lol, because whatever the ego thinks in the end all that is only anxiety, and coping with it.