is it possible to bio-engineer carbs to be good for you instead of bad? if so, why hasn't it been done?
carbs are good for you.you are indolent.
Carbs aren’t unhealthy. What’s unhealthy is eating them and not exercising or moving you fat fuck
>>21745705youre better off trying to find the holy grail
>>21745705I don't have an issue with carbs. Potatoes, milk, sugar, fruit, all that is fine. But I have an issue with grains and beans, they're hard to digest and make me feel sick. It might be possible to modify them to have less of the things that make them hard to digest and cause reactions in some people.Some people do have problems with starch and sugar in general but that's not really common.
>>21745741Fpbp
can we limit keto/carnivore schizo posting to one thread at a time?
>>21745705>why hasn't it been done?you got some real fucking issues there, op.
>>21745773>I have an issue with grains and beans, they're hard to digest and make me feel sick. It might be possible to modify them to have less of the things that make them hard to digest and cause reactions in some people.your genetic weakness is not the rest of the world's charge.
>>21745773they make you feel sick because your gut bacteria is fucked from an entire life of eating garbage
>>21745962loser>>21745964my gut bacteria is fine, that's not what the issue is
>>21745773Try sourdough bread if you haven't already.
>>21746278I like sourdough, I've made it a bunch of times. Unfortunately some storebought sourdough breads seem like regular bread with sour flavorings added. When I realized I tolerated fermented bean/grain products more it made me think that there was probably a reason most cultures seemed to ferment those things more than we do today. At least from what I've read it doesn't seem like eating unfermented grain was very common in the past. Sprouting grains and beans also seems to have been a bit more common in the past too which is supposed to make it easier to digest.
>>21746143>loseranon...
>>21745705Carbs aren't bad for you, fucking moron.
>>21746382yes?
>>21745705It's called gluten.
>>21745705They already have. They make them resistant so they're not converted into sugar. If you look at products like pic related they're made primarily of "Modified wheat starch" or other "modified starch". These are carbs from your usual sources which are made into resistant starch. You can do it at home, too, by freezing rice or bread. I don't know how well that works but supposedly it does.
>>21745705I think you would have to bioengineer the person, not the carbs.
>>21745705
>>21746628>you would have to bioengineer the personalready happened, it's called being white
>>21746756wheat came from the middle east
>>21745764Or eating to much you fitness shill.
>>21745705As >>21745741 said, carbs are already good for you. Your diet should be mostly carbs because that's what your body and the body of literally all primates is built to digest.Your confusion comes from the fact that certain carbs (grains, starches) are bad for you whereas other carbs (fruits, sugars) are good for you.
>>21745964I fucked up my gut bacteria from eating garbage and I can't eat grains or beans any more.
>>21746908sure
>>21746760so did christianity
>>21746896>shilling being healthyuh
>>21747006
Grains lose their nutrition rapidly once milled. I mill my own immediately before cooking/baking with my flours. The result is carbs that have a smooth digestion curve I can process healthy provided I enjoy a reasonable intake. Buy an electric flourmill that uses grinding wheels.
>>21746902>(grains, starches) are bad for you whereas other carbs (fruits, sugars) are good for you.Carbs are sugars. The only difference between carbs and sugars is how fast they enter the bloodstream. Most fruits should be treated like sweets. Bad for our teeth, sugar bombs, fine in moderation or as seasonal treats.Our bodies have a far easier time digesting protein and fats than carbs. The comparison with other primates falls flat, because none of them use fire and heat to treat their food. So our digestive tracts show some of the biggest differences. Few people can live off raw carb rich plants and vegetables. Pretty much anybody can live off raw meat and fish and vegetables.
>>21748272>Most fruits should be treated like sweets. Bad for our teeth, sugar bombs, fine in moderation or as seasonal treats.Starch is bad for your teeth too, sometimes worse than sugar. And starches can also impact blood sugar more sometimes.>sugar bombsPlease stop saying "bombs" when trying to make a food seem negative. People do it all the time and it's just becoming silly.>Our bodies have a far easier time digesting proteinProtein is hardest to digest. Something like 30% of the calories from protein get lost because it takes more energy to digest compared to fat and carbs. Unless you're comparing it to raw starch which is pretty hard to digest, but we kind of evolved and adapted to cooked starch which is easier. Harder than sugar but still easier than protein.
>>21745705"Carbs bad" is too reductionist. France, Japan, etc. eat tons of carbs.However.This spaghetti is good. It's got the protein and fiber, but less simple carbohydrates.
>>21748287>but less simple carbohydrates.Starch is a complex carb.
>>21748301but the flesh of your stupid whore mother is not
>>21748328*beats you to a pulp using my mother as a blunt object*
>>21748284Oh, it's you. You are already back to deflecting to other foods instead of admitting that fruits are bad for our teeth. Won't waste my time on you.>we evolved to cooked starchStarch was a minor part of our diet until 10k years ago. That's all.
>>21746585I'm not letting myself fall for that shit again. Pretty soon you're buying "sugar-free" Atkins pecan caramel clusters and peanut M&Ms and eating "keto bread" and caulflower crust frozen pizzas and you're not bothering to look at the carbs on the labels. Once you do you realize why you're not losing weight. Not only does a lot of FDA loopholes and technical mumbo jumbo allow them to convince us that 'net fiber' carbs are different and that the absence of 'added sugars' makes it okay, but just the practice of eating the kinds of foods which contributed to your weight gain in the first place is playing with fire. You start with some kind of justified 'carb-friendly' type treat and in small steps you're slowing introducing more and more of that shit back into your diet. A piece of bread here, a small piece of candy there, and before long you're barely paying attention, maybe avoiding most carbs about half the time, and then the weight starts creeping back up. You gotta keep yourself in check. Maybe you're stronger than me. I had to do a bit of a reset and start clean with meat and vegetables. Got rid of all that shit I never should have had in the first place. Yeah, all I need is to start believing I can eat white rice again as long as it spends some time in the freezer. LOL, get real. I know myself and I can't give me any special leeway or I'll be off to the trough.
>>21748287I bought myself 3 boxes of their penne from Amazon when I thought I deserved a mac and cheese cheat. But I have yet to try it. I've found that most weird pastas have awful texture. Spelt, gluten free stuff.. I don't care for it. Those conjac noodles seem to be more trouble than they're worth, and I got some low carb ramen that was really expensive and again, texture sucked. They go from a bad kind of chewy to overcooked mush. It's better in my opinion to either stay the fuck away from all that or just cheat with the actual thing you want. Eat the pizza, the ramen, the whatever. And then get back on the horse. I'm an impulse buyer so I get an idea and then order everything to make it and may never make it. I have everything for some flax bread which is apparently 2g carbs per slice or something gamechanging, but I still haven't baked a loaf. I'm pretty damn lazy. Which is exactly why lowcarb is my kind of diet. lolI am always full and satisfied and for the first time in my life I don't eat like an obese food addict. Carbs were like a drug addiction. Not food, just carbs. I didn't figure that out until way later. When I eat carbs I just keep eating and can't get full.
>>21748378Hi I missed you and I never said fruit can't be bad for your teeth10k years is long enough for major adaptations to occur. Genetic changes have occurred to people who started farming crops around that time and they produce more of the enzymes to digest starch. Just like people have adapted to dairy in that time too.
>>21747065That you dont have to be the first to be the best
>>21745705Carbs are good for you. The problem is that most people don't do enough cardio to make use of them.
>>21748425>When I eat carbs I just keep eating and can't get full.You're lying. Please show a video of you continuously eating oatmeal without getting full
>>21748425>When I eat carbs I just keep eating and can't get full.Have you tried eating just potatoes? I had the same problem but I get full from potatoes pretty easily. My issue seems to only be with grains and beans which are known to be harder to digest.
>>21748405Im that anon and I've slowly dropped 40 lb this year mostly though diet. It hasn't been a struggle this time because I've just substituted low calories alternatives to help with "bad" food cravings this time. I'm not on a keto diet, but "keto" branded products have significantly lower calories which is why they've helped. > Maybe you're stronger than me. I had to do a bit of a reset and start clean with meat and vegetables.Probably the opposite. I can't do the absolutist diet, I always break. For me it's easier to have the option to indulge in the occasional "bad" meal that I make at home from these products.I still eat bread sometimes, but only hard rye. There's a dry shiritaki rice that I use when I crave a big bowl of rice with saucy meat on top. There's "keto bread" when I want to make a burger, "keto crust" when I want to make a pizza, or those "keto wraps" I posted when I want a bean and cheese burrito. It cuts out a couple or few hundred calories from these meals while keeping them enjoyable. This helps me stick to chicken breast and broccoli for another few days until the next slopout. Whereas if I try to stick to only lean meats and veggies, I go feral after a few days.
>>21745741This.Important for regulating hormones.If you get off your fat dumb ass you can use them as energy, too.
>>21745773Beans are toxic. That's why you have to soak them and boil the crap out of them. Some of them will actually kill you if you prepare them incorrectly. All plants are trying to kill you if you eat them. Some are just bigger assholes about it than others.
>>21746303Yeah bro sprout your grains then make things with them.
>>21749908>All plants are trying to kill you if you eat them.objectively wrong, tons of plants want certain parts of them to get eaten
>>21750195Only in particular ways to spread their seeds. There are plants that are 100% deadly to humans that are the preferred food of some animals.
>>21745705> is it possible to bio-engineer carbs to be good for you>>>>/out/
>>21745705>remove useless/inflammatory gluten>introduce insulin/glycemic index attenuating elements>tailor things to make job of yeast easierOf course. But that's not the point. The point is squeezing dubious gains on subsidies from the Depression era and Cold War to bribe shitholes with food payments with poisonous pesticides they're made to tolerate.
>>21745705if you cant eat bread you should probably just die
>>21750243but if everyone alive could eat bread then you wouldn't have anything making you special
>>21748272It's wild how the keto cult has led midwits to unironically believe that fruit is bad for you.
You think it's the carbs that make modern bread bad for you? You're an idiot and probably American, so you probably think the only way to make bread is use packets of enslaved microorganisms you buy at a store. And then you wonder why the food revolts again you?How do you think human beings made bread, nourished themselves on it and brought us to our current point if it was "bad" for you? Bread is good, but you can't even get real bread almost anywhere these days thanks to capitalists who want to dispossess us of our ancestral heritage.When your great, great granny made bread what did she use? She didn't use a fucking yeast packet or baking powder, that's for sure. Because your ancestors were retarded and lived in filth, yeast infections were endemic amongst the women and sanitation was an unknown concept. That means your great, great granny would have gone directly from the outhouse where she was scritchin her yeasty craw directly into the cabin and kneading bread with unwashed hands. In doing so, she would pass on her ancestral knowledge to whoever ate the bread.You're going about this all wrong because you're retarded, OP. You don't need to bioengineer bread, you need to take what belongs to you and use it to nourish yourself. Scrape some off granny and get to kneading.
>>21751257meh even before keto people were trying to say fruit is bad because sugar even if they were still eating starch. sugar being added to processed food has made people think all sugar is bad all the time.
>>21751257Saying fruit is fine in moderation or when in season has nothing to do with keto.
>>21751358what is "in moderation"? because treating it like sweets means eating it like once or twice a week? that seems a bit excessive to me since fruit has never really been associated with any negative health outcomes like processed sweets actually have been
>>21751365You eat it after a meal like a dessert. Like you would sweets. Ever wondered why people can easily eat sweet dessert after a meal? Our bodies make space for sweet things. As if sweet fruits have been an infrequent but high quality food. If you only look at fruits that are native to Europe, then once or twice a week doesn't sound far fetched from how often the average person would have had fruit averaged out across the year.
>>21751283i aint readin all that shit nigga
incredible thread
>>21745705You don't need to bio-engineer shit, retrograde starches already exist.
>>21751467>Ever wondered why people can easily eat sweet dessert after a meal? Our bodies make space for sweet things.Sugar is really low residue so it doesn't add much bulk to your stomach. And at least with fruit it's hydrating, helps digestion. Same reason you can drink a beverage after a meal even if it's not sweet.>Our bodies make space for sweet things. As if sweet fruits have been an infrequent but high quality food.I don't see the correlation here.>If you only look at fruits that are native to EuropeNorthern Europe would be very different from southern Europe. Western Europe could have berries and apples available most of the year. Tropical regions would have fruit available more often too, it's not that uncommon for fruit to be growing year round in tropical regions.>how often the average person would have had fruit averaged out across the year.That would depend on things like where you lived, it wouldn't be difficult to have fruit more than once or twice a week in a lot of places. And even then in places like Northern Europe where fresh fruit wouldn't always be available, fruit preservation was a thing to have it when fresh fruit was scarce. People in cities in the past may not have eaten as much fresh fruit but that would be due to other issues like transportation and shelf life. Growing and eating fruit was probably more common for farmers outside of serfs.If we include honey then a lot of hunter-gatherers eat honey pretty much every day and sometimes in large amounts too.
>>21745705>>21745959The dietary retard and the AI retard meet.
>>21749908>All plants are trying to kill you if you eat them.Literal made up bullshit.>beans are toxic if you don't cook themTry eating raw chicken and see how that goes. Most foods are better cooked.
>>21751997Didn't even read that.
>>21752110because you know you're spouting "trust me bro" tier nonsense
>>21745764>>21745741exercise does not burn nearly enough calories to lose weight you guys need to watch that one kursgesat video about thisyou must fix your diet
>>21751997Look up when fruits and nuts were domesticated. There are species that we only domesticated in the 20th century.>If we include honey then a lot of hunter-gatherers eat honey pretty much every day and sometimes in large amounts too.Source.
>>21753061Humans ate meats and milks with a bit of veg
>>21752369post body
>>21752369The exercise itself doesn't make you lose weight, it's the regularity of exercise that increases your metabolism and raises your baseline calorie burn rate.
>>21753061https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/food-matters/honey-makes-up-nearly-20-percent-of-diet-in-tanzanian-group/
>>21753061>Look up when fruits and nuts were domesticated. There are species that we only domesticated in the 20th century.Pretty much everything we eat has been domesticated. Modern domesticated animals produce more eggs and milk and fat too compared to wild animals. Wild hazelnuts were abundant in Europe, not really sure about nuts elsewhere. Modern apples are sweeter and less tart but they were still abundant along with berries in Europe.
>>21753151You missed the point.
>>21753153The point wasn't clear.
>>21753144That is one group of 1.000 people living in one particular area in one particular climate where they have a symbiosis going on with a particular type of bird. The implications of seasons are beyond you. Waste of time.
>>21753166The Maasai in Africa regularly eat honey, the Pygmy people do too. The Ache people in South America do the same. Enough examples for you now? You could've just asked for more or used that as proof that you might be wrong and to start doing your own research instead of just repeating incorrect information.>where they have a symbiosis going on with a particular type of bird.Yeah it's pretty cool how that happened.>The implications of seasons are beyond you. Waste of time.lol you're so dramatic
>>21753161Because you are an idiot.Take Poland as an example. In November there are apples, pears and cranberries available. Then from December to April only apples and pears are 'in season'. (Only because of modern storage technologies) For ancient people living in this region, that's half a year with very limited acces to fruits and or berries. Basically they only had what they could harvest and store when the fruits were in season. What did I say that got you so yippi?>>21751467>If you only look at fruits that are native to Europe, then once or twice a week doesn't sound far fetched from how often the average person would have had fruit averaged out across the year.You are out of your depth, sorry.
>>21753183>Because you are an idiot.>What did I say that got you so yippi?idk i feel like i should be asking you that, maybe you're taking things too personally>Then from December to April only apples and pears are 'in season'. (Only because of modern storage technologies)By modern storage technology do you mean like a basic cellar? Because apples will last for months without much effort involved. Drying fruit doesn't really require any technology, you just leave it in the sun. It wouldn't be impossible to regularly consume fruit even during winter. Some fruit still persists a bit through winter and could still be gathered.
>>21753125Your body just makes up the calories by sleeping more or low energy at other times of dayExercise is good but you dont just get to eat what you want
>>21751365The demonization of natural sugar and fruit is a political stunt brought to you by the same people who have been selling you fake sugar made of corn for the last few decades, I mean look at what's happening in Latin America and the Caribbean right now. I had a lychee soda the other day from an Asian country that hasn't been smearing sugar and still uses the real thing and it was the most delicious drink I've had in years, I'm a U.S. person who had legitimately forgotten how great real sugar is until that moment.Just so you know, the people who want you to ration your fake sugar do not intend to stop at that, they want to farm you like livestock.
>>21754765I agree with you on the fake sugar. Things like HFCS and maltodextrin are incredibly harmful. On that same note, you should really take a look at your 'natural' fruit. It's been modified/bred to be far, far more sweet than what is found in nature. Even the watermelon is nothing like what the Romans came across in Sudan and our apples are even more of an abomination. There is absolutely no reason for it other than creating and feeding an addiction, i.e. making people into pay pigs. Honestly, there's no reason for using sugar of any kind at all.
>>21754900>There is absolutely no reason for it other than creating and feeding an addiction, i.e. making people into pay pigs.Of course there is. More sugar means more calories per apple, which means a batch can feed more people, which makes more efficient use of land and makes those apples more marketbale. Maybe in modern developed countries where food is abundant, it's an excess. But they came up with giga sweet fruit a long time ago. Red Delicious is 150 years old and Gala is about 100 years old.
>>21754900>addictionIt's just food, it shouldn't be talked about like it's a drug. Hunter-gatherers frequently say honey is their favorite food. People liking sugar isn't new or unnatural or inherently unhealthy.HFCS isn't "healthy" but it's not that different from honey either. The hysteria around HFCS has probably been a bit overblown. I don't really know about the fruit thing. It's possible that fruit being sweeter means e.g. someone might only tolerate eating one or two apples before feeling like they had enough sugar but with a low sugar variety they may eat more for less calories and overall get more of the other nutrients in fruit? I still don't think the sugar in fruit is inherently bad and I've yet to see a single piece of evidence saying fruit consumption is associated with any kind of negative outcome. The only claims against fruit are from people saying it has sugar and sugar is bad but that's not exactly accurate. Processed food isn't bad just because it has sugar and blaming sugar so much is ignoring everything else going on.
>>21752369>watch Kurzgezog>paid for in part by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (AKA: fucking vampires)No. I lost any interest in that channel when they took money from satanic eugenicists.
>>21755251>It's just food, it shouldn't be talked about like it's a drugIt's engineered specifically to be more addictive. It is a drug. I'm not saying it's as bad as the packaged ultra-high processed food, but it is definitely not good in the amounts that most people eat it because of that sugar addiction.>The only claims against fruit are from people saying it has sugar and sugar is bad but that's not exactly accurate.I agree. My gripe with fruit is that we've bred it to be incredibly sweet without regard to any other nutrients that are being pushed out in favor of fructose, sucrose, and/or glucose. We've also made them larger. The easiest example to see this in is bananas. The ones we've made are double the size with damn near no seeds in comparison to the natural wild ones.
>>21755253terrible take
