Post: #26

This girl doesn't just eat bananas.

Anyways, I think there is something to fruit that is often overlooked. I've heard many people say it's the most perfect food, and you can't deny its ability to deliver energy.

If you think about it, nothing takes less preparation to make it palatable. No need to cook fruit or often even to cut it apart - you may have to peel it, and there's your food perfectly protected inside. Think about how perfectly nature packages a banana for consumption - whatever you believe about the nature of reality, there's something interesting there.

And there is no acquired taste with most fruits like there are with a lot of veggies. They're delicious from the first bite.

Fruit is loaded with vitamins, antioxidants, mincronutrients, minerals, even protein in some cases, and and other chemicals that don't even register on nutritional factsheets yet but that may very good for us regardless. Fruit is shown to prevent a whole lot of the diseases we hate.

As a way to lose weight, the banana diet and other fruit diets have been going around for a while, with people getting great results and reporting some interesting side effects at least worth considering when you take into account the other natural solutions the manosphere has discovered.

Not sure if it was ever disproved, but an anthropologist who studied fossilized teeth of primitive humans in the late 70s believed fruit was once the majority of our diet (New York Times artcile). http://health101.org/art_diet2.htm Interestingly enough, the one big hole in the paleo diet that I see (I'm not against high-meat diets at all) is that our teeth do not appear to belong to a carnivore.

I'm no expert, but I've dug around enough to believe that worries about the sugar in fruit are unfounded or at least blown out of proportion, as they are very different from the sugars we consume in ice cream and cookies.

It may not be for you, especially if you're a lifter, but around here many of us believe that the healthiest thing for you is an all meat and eggs diet, which most people think is insane and unhealthy. In fact, I imagine that the average person's response to coming across the steak and eggs diet would be about what yours was to this woman. They would assert the men pushing these diets on their blogs were nutjobs with some unfortunate health surprises in their future.

To be clear, I'm not jumping into this thread to argue for the fruit revolution, and I'm not saying agree with her, or especially with her attitude and lifestyle. But it's always best to keep an open mind before assuming you've got the last word on nutrition, which is one of those arguments that will probably never reach a consensus. I second what Basil Ransom said - try it out and post your results.

Of course, there is speculation that fruitarianism may have caused Steve Jobs' pancreatic cancer (due to the high fructose), so there's that. Then again, it is at the moment, like most nutritional conversations, just speculation - others believe it was his diet that kept him going so long. I'd like to see some real long-term research into all-fruit diets, but I don't think any exist.

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #27

(11-04-2014 09:12 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  Of course, there is speculation that fruitarianism may have caused Steve Jobs' pancreatic cancer (due to the high fructose), so there's that. Then again, it is at the moment, like most nutritional conversations, just speculation - others believe it was his diet that kept him going so long. I'd like to see some real long-term research into all-fruit diets, but I don't think any exist.

A older guy (70) I worked with died of pancreatic cancer. He came to work with a giant mug of Coca Cola every morning, had a big gut. So I guess I'm skeptical about a specific diet causing anyone's pancreatic cancer. Though it does throw a bit of a wet blanket on the the assertion that a diet like this is some sort of miracle of cancer prevention. It may be relatively good for you, but there definitely needs to be long-term research done. Anecdotal evidence just doesn't tell us very much.

Post: #28

(11-04-2014 01:24 AM)Carlos100 Wrote:  Is there a danger of Type B diabetes from eating so much fruit?

(11-04-2014 01:30 AM)boinerd Wrote:  That's too much sugar, It's a fruit.

The sugar inside of a fruit is NOT the same as the chemically and mechanically refined sugar in soda, candy, and processed foods.

The sugar inside of a fruit is surrounded by fiber and enzymes that allow it to absorbed slowly into the body without the insulin spikes of refined sugar.

All "sugar" is not equal.

When I was a kid I ate some Cocoa Puffs and on the back of the box was a picture of an apple and it read "A serving of Cocoa Puffs has less sugar than this".

Even though I didn't know much about nutrition then, my BS meter went off immediately.

Post: #29

(11-04-2014 09:12 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  Of course, there is speculation that fruitarianism may have caused Steve Jobs' pancreatic cancer (due to the high fructose), so there's that. Then again, it is at the moment, like most nutritional conversations, just speculation - others believe it was his diet that kept him going so long. I'd like to see some real long-term research into all-fruit diets, but I don't think any exist.

The mainstream media (which is heavily funded by drug companies) are always putting out BS about Jobs because he didn't immediately get chemo and radiation like a good little citizen is supposed to do...and if he had have got it...he would have lived longer...

Let's see how modern medicine worked for other celebrities with pancreatic cancer.

Michael Landon: Dead - 3 months after diagnosis.

Patrick Swayze: Dead - 20 months after diagnosis.

Steve Jobs: Dead - 8 YEARS after diagnosis.

Post: #30

She might be a nutjob, but i agree that if this is what it takes for American women to lower their BMI then I'm all for it.

Regarding the Fruitarianism or whatever, it sounds like a load of bullshit.

We're omnivores, we're meant to eat a wide variety of foods. I'm too lazy right now to reference it but there is a plethora of research suggesting that the more varied our diet is, the healthier we are. Of course people can come up with exceptions like the Inuit that eat mostly seal, but these people could hardly be considered healthy and have a much lower life expectancy.

We evolved to eat damn near anything. Foraged plants, bone marrow, rodents, insects. Discovering fire made even more calories available due to increasing the safety of eating meat. We're the only animals that eat cooked food and our bodies are extremely well-adapted to do so...think about that. We eat raw and cooked food, from the ocean, air, land. We eat fermented foods, rotting foods, salted foods. The human body can process all of this. A diet this varied would kill any other animal.

In that same line of thought, it has been suggested that the less varied our diet is, the more health maladies can occur. The American food production system is a great example as the industrial agriculture system has pushed to eliminate biodiversity and produce just 4 types of tomatoes when there are hundreds of varieties (a section of which you can find at any decent farmer's market) We produce a couple types of cattle, one strain of corn, maybe 4 strains of onions, 1 strain of chickens...and so on. What you see in any mass grocery store is a tiny, TINY fraction of what the human body can, and is meant to, consume.

In asia I learned that there are dozens of varieties of wild greens that don't even have names. The common names translate to things like "Things to eat with larb" (if you're in thailand) even though it might be 8 different herbs. There is a HUGE variety of foods eaten in asia, because traditionally people have to if they want to survive. Live grubs, barbecued frog, dog, chicken soup with blood cake? Sounds like breakfast. See any fatties there? You might, but only because KFC and Burger King are so popular there now.

Post: #31

(11-04-2014 09:12 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  Anyways, I think there is something to fruit that is often overlooked. I've heard many people say it's the most perfect food, and you can't deny its ability to deliver energy.

If you think about it, nothing takes less preparation to make it palatable. No need to cook fruit or often even to cut it apart - you may have to peel it, and there's your food perfectly protected inside. Think about how perfectly nature packages a banana for consumption - whatever you believe about the nature of reality, there's something interesting there.

And there is no acquired taste with most fruits like there are with a lot of veggies. They're delicious from the first bite.

Fruit is loaded with vitamins, antioxidants, mincronutrients, minerals, even protein in some cases, and and other chemicals that don't even register on nutritional factsheets yet but that may very good for us regardless. Fruit is shown to prevent a whole lot of the diseases we hate.

As a way to lose weight, the banana diet and other fruit diets have been going around for a while, with people getting great results and reporting some interesting side effects at least worth considering when you take into account the other natural solutions the manosphere has discovered.

Not sure if it was ever disproved, but an anthropologist who studied fossilized teeth of primitive humans in the late 70s believed fruit was once the majority of our diet (New York Times artcile). http://health101.org/art_diet2.htm Interestingly enough, the one big hole in the paleo diet that I see (I'm not against high-meat diets at all) is that our teeth do not appear to belong to a carnivore.

I'm no expert, but I've dug around enough to believe that worries about the sugar in fruit are unfounded or at least blown out of proportion, as they are very different from the sugars we consume in ice cream and cookies.

It may not be for you, especially if you're a lifter, but around here many of us believe that the healthiest thing for you is an all meat and eggs diet, which most people think is insane and unhealthy. In fact, I imagine that the average person's response to coming across the steak and eggs diet would be about what yours was to this woman. They would assert the men pushing these diets on their blogs were nutjobs with some unfortunate health surprises in their future.

To be clear, I'm not jumping into this thread to argue for the fruit revolution, and I'm not saying agree with her, or especially with her attitude and lifestyle. But it's always best to keep an open mind before assuming you've got the last word on nutrition, which is one of those arguments that will probably never reach a consensus. I second what Basil Ransom said - try it out and post your results.

Of course, there is speculation that fruitarianism may have caused Steve Jobs' pancreatic cancer (due to the high fructose), so there's that. Then again, it is at the moment, like most nutritional conversations, just speculation - others believe it was his diet that kept him going so long. I'd like to see some real long-term research into all-fruit diets, but I don't think any exist.

I strongly disagree with this statement and heres why:

Our ancestors did not eat the fruit we eat today. Fruit from before agriculture was far smaller, more bitter and contained much less sugar. Modern fruit has evolved through human-imposed genetic selection to provide the maximum amount of calories (in this case, fructose) combined with the most palatable flavor. This allows consumers to binge eat fruit, which will result in a negative endocrine response, ie heavy insulin production and pancreatic stress. Heavy consumption of modern fruit could very well lead to diabetes.

It is safe to say that yes, fruit you buy at the grocery store requires minimum preparation. But that fruit has been prepared over thousands of years of agriculture and human selection. Any more than one serving a day of fruit, which IMO should only be small berries or other wild picked fruit, is detrimental.

Source: years of study in evolution, modern diet and endocrinology.

Post: #32

This is what a wild banana looks like



It's not at all what you'd buy at wholefoods or whatever - The ones there have been bred, for generations, to be sweeter and seedless.

The same applies to any other fruit or veg you get today - nothing at all like the original found in the wild. Typically wild ones have larger/more seeds and are less sweet.

Post: #33

(11-04-2014 09:12 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  Interestingly enough, the one big hole in the paleo diet that I see (I'm not against high-meat diets at all) is that our teeth do not appear to belong to a carnivore.

It may not be for you, especially if you're a lifter, but around here many of us believe that the healthiest thing for you is an all meat and eggs diet, which most people think is insane and unhealthy.

Our teeth are those of an omnivore. No surprises there. Hardly a problem for paleo advocates.

And I haven't heard anyone except for a few gym bros advocate the steak and eggs diet or anything like it.

I'm not dogmatic paleo (eat rice and have a sweet tooth which I indulge from time to time) but essentially paleo is about eating minimally processed animal products and plant foods except for grains. I eat loads of meat and loads of vegetables, simple and balanced.

Post: #34

(11-08-2014 11:42 PM)RawGod Wrote:  -snip-

I'm not dogmatic paleo (eat rice and have a sweet tooth which I indulge from time to time) but essentially paleo is about eating minimally processed animal products and plant foods except for grains. I eat loads of meat and loads of vegetables, simple and balanced.

This kind of approach is commonly referred to as functional paleo - eating exactly like they did thousands of years ago is impossible, but eating minimally processed, organic/free-range/etc foods is an attainable goal that maintains all the advantages of paleo.

Post: #35

Quote:She might be a nutjob, but i agree that if this is what it takes for American women to lower their BMI then I'm all for it.

I still don't see how eating 30 bananas a day will help with this. Let's do some simple math:

Assuming each banana has 105 calories and 27g of carbohydrates.

30 x 105 = 3,150 calories every day.
30 x 27 = 810g of carbohydrates everyday.

This is like 1000 calories more than the average 2000 calorie diet, just on bananas.

Not to mention the ridiculously high amount of carbohydrates, every day.

Post: #36

Never follow this woman's advise or even worse her psycho of a boyfriend named "Durianrider" They are both extreme narcissistic. They used to promote a 100% raw vegan diet, talking bad about anything with oil in it for years. Now they both are eating things with oil in it. They are the biggest hypocrites in the world. She has fake boobs and the body of a 12 year old. Never take advise from these people, trust me!! There used to be a whole website 30bananasadaysucks.com just completely ripping these 2 apart. Jack Lalanne had it all figured out many years ago, take advise from that guy.

Post: #37

She forgot to mention that she burns through 30 diapers a day too.

Post: #38

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose

Post: #39

You guys are hating on a girl eating a natural healthy diet and staying thin?

What, you want her to do crossfit and rave about bone broth?

Post: #40

(11-11-2014 02:50 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  You guys are hating on a girl eating a natural healthy diet and staying thin?

What, you want her to do crossfit and rave about bone broth?

Bone broth is the shit!

Post: #41

I've seen her on youtube it's fucking hilarious her and her boyfriend act like they are on crack they have that much sugar/glucose in their systems. Terrible diet this bitxh is a heart attack waiting to happen!

Saying that she makes $20,000 per month from her youtube channel telling wierdos and faggots to eat this way and they love her.

Post: #42

I think someone may have already mentioned this, but Fruit digests very quickly (15-20 mins) and because its mostly water, those with digestive problems notice a significant improvement.

One of the anti-aging theories is that, the longer your digestive system is in use, the quicker it wears out; most peoples systems run non-stop without rest.

For example beef & pork may take 4 hrs to digest, then if you mix it with a starch it may double the process. Although he no longer promotes it, Tony Robbins used to follow the "Food Combining/Fit For Life" theory which states eating the same exact foods but in a different order can have opposite effects. The guy is 54 yrs old and has still has swag/charisma thru the roof, which is why I use him as an example. He's the only person I can find who started in his early 20s and can demonstrate long term results. He did mention in an interview he started eating Fish again when he was 35.

Going back to the beef in particular, I don't think our ancestors were taking down large 1000 lb animals on a regular basis. They were probably roaming around lakes grabbing fish out of water, or climbin up trees and stealing eggs out of nests. I notice alot of people who claim lacto ovo or pescetarian seem to be exceptionally healthy.

(11-08-2014 05:29 PM)RIslander Wrote:  I strongly disagree with this statement and heres why:

Our ancestors did not eat the fruit we eat today. Fruit from before agriculture was far smaller, more bitter and contained much less sugar. Modern fruit has evolved through human-imposed genetic selection to provide the maximum amount of calories (in this case, fructose) combined with the most palatable flavor. This allows consumers to binge eat fruit, which will result in a negative endocrine response, ie heavy insulin production and pancreatic stress. Heavy consumption of modern fruit could very well lead to diabetes.

It is safe to say that yes, fruit you buy at the grocery store requires minimum preparation. But that fruit has been prepared over thousands of years of agriculture and human selection. Any more than one serving a day of fruit, which IMO should only be small berries or other wild picked fruit, is detrimental.

Source: years of study in evolution, modern diet and endocrinology.

In addition to this, I was reading into Macrobiotics (what Madonna used to follow), and one of the ideas is cultivated fruits vs ancient fruits. Bottom line, many fruits today only came about after agiiculture, and farmers began messing around.

Another interesting idea, don't remember whether I read it in "Sugar Blues" or "Pure White and Deadly", but fruit is only in season 8-12 weeks a year; it was only in the 1940s that we began importing it from other countries. Many diets like South Beach & Atkins have 'phases' which looks to be very effective as opposed to eating the same way year round.

(11-08-2014 11:32 PM)dasher Wrote:  This is what a wild banana looks like



It's not at all what you'd buy at wholefoods or whatever - The ones there have been bred, for generations, to be sweeter and seedless.

The same applies to any other fruit or veg you get today - nothing at all like the original found in the wild. Typically wild ones have larger/more seeds and are less sweet.

Adding on, alot of things have been cross bred with other fruits/vegs to become lighter. For example look at the original carrots:

Post: #43

A lot of great thoughts and ideas on here, from a post that was originally just a laugh at some wacky vegan girl. That's what we all love about RVF.

I'm going to give a try to incorporating more fruit into my diet, and see how it goes. No damn way I'd ever become a vegan or fruitarian. I was a vegetarian for 2 years, and it was absolute rubbish. T was through the floor, but I was into spirituality at the time, didn't' care about women.

Post: #44

(11-04-2014 09:12 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  Interestingly enough, the one big hole in the paleo diet that I see (I'm not against high-meat diets at all) is that our teeth do not appear to belong to a carnivore.

Our teeth are those of an omnivore, and besides, the biggest food digesting difference between us and all other animals is that we cook most of our foods. This explains why we could digest foods that we're not "supposed" to digest particularly well, naturally.

It's a good argument you can throw at vegans, followed by a TKO with this:

Post: #45

This isn't healthy.

Humans are omnivores and were meant to eat a variety of different things.

Humans are also SUPPOSED to lead lives of hardship and toil. Fortunately we've done away with subsistence farming and hunting, but these fruit butts need to do some heavy lifting.

Notice the most attractive and healthy people lift weights? That isn't a coincidence.

Chick has crazy eyes. Bang then bounce.

Post: #46

This guy is a big troll. I remember when he trolled mark sissons' forum, with non logic, and tons of replies.

Post: #47

This pic was posted on my facebook wall just now

(11-11-2014 12:28 AM)lucasboy87 Wrote:  Never follow this woman's advise or even worse her psycho of a boyfriend named "Durianrider" They are both extreme narcissistic. They used to promote a 100% raw vegan diet, talking bad about anything with oil in it for years. Now they both are eating things with oil in it. They are the biggest hypocrites in the world. She has fake boobs and the body of a 12 year old. Never take advise from these people, trust me!! There used to be a whole website 30bananasadaysucks.com just completely ripping these 2 apart. Jack Lalanne had it all figured out many years ago, take advise from that guy.

Post: #48

I'm sure people here agree you can't draw conclusions looking at 1 or 2 individual cases (ref to Steve Jobs). Everything works on probability. See below two tables and judge for yourself before bashing out at vegetarianism/veganism.

Table 1 - meat consumption by country (source FAO) - http://bit.ly/1vm036A
Table 2 - cancer deaths by country (source WHO) - http://bit.ly/1B022op

Though I can't find conclusive research in the mainstream to correlate cancer risk to diet habits, a simple look at the two tables suggests something. Nearly all top 10% meat consuming countries are also in top 10% risk of cancer, and nearly all bottom 10% meat consuming countries are also in bottom 10% risk of cancer.

[I didn't dig up data for heart disease risk, but I'm fairly certain you'll find similar correlations]

P.S. It's probably true that overeating fruits increase pancreatic cancer risk by x%, but the standard american meat diet increases any cancer risk by 10x% (I made these numbers up, but you get the idea).
P.S.2 I'm not endorsing a fruitarian diet. I'm a healthy vegan who eats a variety of vegan sources in moderation. Nor am I interested in converting people to veganism. As they say in French, chacun ses goûts (to each his/her own?)