 And now, this is the moment you all watching around the world have been waiting for in the sold-out Primal Edge Health livestream. It's time to ours for the undisputed vegan versus carnivore heavyweight championship of the world. Introducing first, fighting out of the green corner with the debate record of 1 win, 0 losses. He stands at 5 foot 11 inches tall, weighing in at 200 and a 1 half pounds, fighting out of his supplement laboratory in Toronto, Canada, presenting Mr. 19 inch arms, Richard vegan gains, and now introducing his opponent, fighting out of the red corner. He stands at 5 foot 8 inches tall, weighing in at 150 and 1 half pounds, fighting out of the Bronx, presenting the pride of New York, Frankie Boy to Fano. Well, you're either trying to say one of two things. Can I demonstrate that increased circulating levels of LDL cholesterol in the blood increases the amount of cholesterol that ends up embedding in the artery wall, or you're mixing up terms again and you're just asking me to show. Now I think you're just delaying me and asking me. No, I'm not. You're just not making any sense. I don't want to turn into just arguing over semantics. If you have a question, a specific question for Richard, or if Richard has a specific question. All right. This is the question. I had the wording incorrect. I did not. Well, I technically didn't have the wording incorrect. He's just not interpreting what I'm saying correctly. Can you show me a study indicating that LDL serum cholesterol is associated with LDL cholesterol binding more to proteoglycans in the arterial wall? Okay. Basically, you're just asking me to show whether or not there's an association between circulating LDL and increased plaque buildup. No. That's not what I'm asking. That literally is what you're asking. No. It is not. That is literally what you're asking. Let me explain what happens when LDL enters the endothelium. It binds to proteoglycans and it is then taken out by HDL cholesterol. If there is not enough HDL cholesterol or the fat is oxidized or it's inflammatory, what happens is a macrophage, a white blood cell, encapsulates the cholesterol. That can then get caught in the arterial wall, become inflamed. I'm asking you to show that increased blood LDL cholesterol increases the binding to proteoglycans as opposed to macrophages picking up cholesterol because it can't be taken out of the arterial wall. That is why I'm asking you to show. I want you to show a mechanism. You're claiming that LDL cholesterol and saturated fat is going to be associated with heart disease, but what's the mechanism in the arterial wall of elevated LDL cholesterol being an issue? You're talking about crap that literally doesn't matter. Okay. It doesn't matter. All right. No. It literally doesn't matter. It's basically like a weird red herring. This weird mechanistic data you're asking for, it just doesn't matter. We have huge meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and genetic research showing. It's not weird mechanistic data. It's a basic function of LDL entering the endothelium. Great. Great. I'm going to share this. I just want to bring up one more thing. Frank is basically claiming that vegan diets are inherently nutritionally deficient due to a number of issues like anti-nutrients and things like beans. If you actually look at the American Dietetics Association, I think they changed their name to the Academy of Nutrition Dietetics, they're the largest nutrition organization in the world. I believe over 100,000 licensed nutrition practitioners. They released a peer-reviewed published paper stating that well-planned appropriately planned vegetarian and fully vegan diets are totally appropriate for all stages of the life cycle including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, and athletes, and vegan vegetarian diets. They also offer protection against numerous chronic diseases including heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and certain cancers. It's pretty clear. It's the consensus among nutrition professionals and experts that you can be perfectly healthy on a vegan diet as long as the diet is appropriately planned. I'm sorry. I'd like to study the position of the American Dietetics Association of Vegetarian Diets and this guy Craig W.J. is one of the authors of this. Our buddy Craig is a Seventh Day Adventist Vegetarian. Mr. J. Craig received his Master of Public Health Degree in Nutrition from the Adventist Run at Loma Linda University. He was once a research chemist at Loma Linda Foods and taught at the Adventist College of West Africa as well as Loma Linda University. Do I have to really go into this or can we just dismiss that study and say there's some sort of vegan and vegetarian diet? Frank, so if you pull up a study and the people who are in charge of that study ate meat, does that mean all the studies you provide are complete bullshit because the people ate meat? No. What they eat has nothing to do with it. They have a religious predisposition to pushing their diet and lifestyle. The Seventh Day Adventist lifestyle. The mission of the department is to prepare dietetic and nutrition professional services to their church, society and the world and to influence the community at large to affirm the Seventh Day Adventist lifestyle, including the vegetarian diet. Okay. Well, no, Frank, these people who eat meat, they want to, they have a bias to promote their lifestyle. Can you give me the name of the meat-eating religion, please? Okay. Well, it doesn't have to be a religion, Frank. It's their lifestyle. Well, the point here specifically is your buddy Craig isn't so objective. He's only one of the authors. Okay. Well, it passed peer review. Let's go into the other authors then. All right. We're going to the other authors. We're going to the other authors in your American Dietetics Association. Okay. We'll do it. Frank, you're still screen sharing, you know. I know. Okay. We got, we got Ann Reed-Mangles, reviewer for the ADA's 1997 Vegetarian Positioned Paper co-author, Vegan for Ethical Reasons. Oh, that's no big deal because she eats vegetables. That's okay. Okay. So, okay. Okay, cool. So, Frank, Frank, all the studies you provide are complete bullshit. Vegan for ethical reasons. Vegan for ethical reasons. Vegan for ethical reasons. Right, okay. Okay. So, all the studies that you provide are bullshit because those people eat meat. So, obviously, they have- But they don't eat meat. They don't eat meat for ethical reasons. They don't eat meat because they like killing animals. They eat meat as a utility for nutrition. Well, no. They eat meat because they grew up eating meat. They think it's normal. They've been told like you have to have meat in your diet to be healthy. So, they have a bias, right? So, you can't. So, every study you provide is complete bull crap because they have a bias because they eat meat. The point is that the bias is not related to diet. The bias is related to their religious affiliation. Well, you just pointed out only one of them was an actual Adventist. The others were just vegan for ethical reasons. A lot of- Do I have to specifically point out every single one of them? That's a Seventh-day Adventist? Okay, Frank. Frank, can you actually point out an issue with their opinion paper? Like the actual paper rather than just assuming they're biased because of possible religious or ethical beliefs? Let's take a look. You said saturated fat and cholesterol bad, but not for babies, right? Well, no. Breast milk does have saturated fat and cholesterol, but it's a growing infant. The nutritional needs are different. So, are the nutritional needs of a growing infant different from a child, a pre-teen or someone through their early stages of life? Yeah. Do they then not need cholesterol and DHA for brain function? Well, no, DHA is a good thing, but as far as saturated fat and cholesterol goes, no. As an adult, you don't need to eat cholesterol. This is diabetes-related deaths from 1968 to 2010. From 1968 to 1980, diabetes-related deaths have gone down drastically. Okay, so, Frank, tell me what diet group has the lowest risk of type 2 diabetes? Well, let me finish what I was going to say here. I just want you to explain something for me, because I'm a little bit confused. Sure, sure. So, diabetes goes down sharply from 1968 to 1980. Okay, wait, wait, wait. This is the death point from diabetes, right? Diabetes deaths per million goes down from 1968 to 1982. Yeah, that's probably because of the use of medication and insulin, and then- Beef consumption went up drastically from 1960 to 1980. So, you think eating 30 pounds of beef per year has no impact on your lifestyle? Wait, what? I don't understand. Beef consumption per capita went from 63 in 1960 to almost over 91 in 1977. Over 30 pounds of meat per capita, well, per year, 30 pounds of meat per year, was consumed more by people. So, you're saying red meat is bad for you? No, I'm saying if red meat consumption goes up 30 pounds and diabetes deaths per million goes down, why would you say that red meat consumption or saturated fat is linked to anything negative when as soon as they stop eating red meat and red meat consumption starts going down, diabetes starts going up again? Well, it's okay. As we see, diabetes goes back down to 2018 to lower levels than it was in 1960. Okay, Frank, you don't think things like medication could affect this? But why would diabetes rates go up? Well, this is death rate from diabetes. This isn't actual prevalence of diabetes. Why would death rate of diabetes go up if our medication and our medical system has improved? Because of increasing rates of obesity and, yeah, I'd say it's mostly obesity. Okay, Frank, is this just some correlation you found or is this an actual study linking red meat consumption to decreased risk of death from type 2 diabetes? No, I was asking you how is it possible that red meat is so bad for you if people eat 30 more pounds of meat a year and diabetes goes down? Okay, well, Frank, this is just an average across the entire population. And is that actually consumption or is it production? That's consumption per capita. How much meat they eat per year? Okay, well, Frank, can you actually find me research showing that increased red meat intake is associated with lower risk of type 2 diabetes? Or death from type 2 diabetes, sorry? Can you show me a study that shows that meat consumption causes type 2 diabetes? Okay, well, yeah, I essentially can. So we actually know precisely what triggers type 2 diabetes. So if you take a look at this study, fatty acids and glucose lipotoxicity and the pathogens of type 2 diabetes. So it goes into detail about this here. Western diets rich in saturated fats cause obesity and insulin resistance and increased levels of circulating non-sterified free fatty acids. In addition, they contribute to beta cell failure and genetically predisposed individuals. So basically what happens is saturated fat creates toxic breakdown products known as non-sterified free fatty acids. And they kill insulin producing beta cells in your pancreas. Poly and monounsaturated fats, on the other hand, don't do this. It's only saturated fat. Now there are plant sources of saturated fat like coconut oil, palm oil. But things like dairy, cheese, red meat, processed meats, they're the most, yeah, like what, you know, this guy's eating here. They're the most significant source of saturated fat in a typical diet. So that is actually the main cause of type 2 diabetes, saturated fat intake. There's also this really interesting paper here. So Richard, can you clarify why saturated fat intake is the number one cause of type 2 diabetes? Oh, okay. So like I just said, it basically kills off the insulin producing beta cell. Is it about saturated fat or is it about meat? Like I thought it was about meat. Yeah. And we were trying to control that meat. So saturated kills beta cells in the pancreas. That's what you're saying? Yeah, it does. Yeah, it does. Saturated fat in the context of a standard American diet kills beta cells in the pancreas. If he wants me to speculate on them, I mean, all he's showing me is that saturated fat in the context of a Western diet causes health issues. And I would agree with that. That does not mean that because meat has saturated fat, that's completely ridiculous. Do you know the vitamin profile of raw grass-fed butter, Richard? No, but Frank, saturated fat creates these toxic breakdown products, which kill insulin producing beta cells in the pancreas. I said earlier, you said that cooking has shaped human evolution. But what foods would they have actually eaten in the Ice Age period? That was the majority of tens, hundreds, hundreds of thousands of years ago. What exact plant foods would they have been eating that they would have gotten nutrition from? And you said that you didn't really touch on the acidity of the stomach, the lack of enzymes like animals, ruminant animals actually have phytase as an enzyme in their digestive system, and they can utilize phytic acid in their bodies. They can actually digest the phosphorus and the nitrogen in the phytic acid. Oh, some of our ape ancestors ate meat and hunted meat. So the point I was making was there's no ape in existence that follows a carnivorous diet, a diet where it's low in carbohydrates, primarily consisting of animal flesh. I mean, I know I have long arms, but I don't look like an ape, right? The things I mentioned earlier, Richard, does Frank look like an ape? Answer, you have to answer the question. Does he look like a non-kitty? Do I have five gallons of plant matter fermenting in my stomach? Does my stomach have an alkaline pH? Am I sitting in the woods chewing plants for 10 hours straight? Okay, I don't know what point you're trying to make. I'm kind of out there. So you're also claiming that plant-based fats are good for you? Yeah, polyaminoin saturated fats. And so generally foods that contain Omega-6 fatty, high amounts of Omega-6. Omega-3 and 6. But generally foods that have a very high Omega-6 to Omega-3 ratio? No, not necessarily. What do you mean? Like, okay, if we're talking about pumpkin seeds, then yeah, they have a huge Omega-6 to 3 ratio. But hemp seeds. So what plant foods are you recommending people consume for healthy fats? For healthy fats. Avocados are fine. Walnuts, hemp seeds, I think are some of the most ideal. Almonds, pistachios, things like that. But all those, I mean, all those nuts contain saturated fat? Yeah, but they're shorter chain length. And they're not long chain fatty acids. Chain length matters. So if we're talking about long chain saturated fats, that would be found in coconut and palm oil. But that's, you know, I don't recommend eating those fats, obviously. So you don't recommend eating them? What? You don't recommend eating the long chain fats? You don't recommend eating the long chain fats, but you recommend eating the short chain fats? Yeah, long chain saturated fats. So things like coconut oil and palm oil. So we shouldn't consume those? Yeah, you should avoid those. You're saying it's okay to have avocados, walnuts, hemp seeds, almonds, pistachios? Yeah, yeah. So why do gorillas and ruminant animals ferment plant foods into long chain fatty acids? They don't. It's short chain fatty acids like butyrate. And we do that, too. Ruminants produce long chain fatty acids in their gut. That's not a, that's not a. Okay. Can you show us research for that? I'd like to see a study. I'm just curious. And really, I don't even care. This is about human health. This gene ELOVL6, which I'm assuming humans don't have, catalyzes the first and rate limiting reaction of the four reactions that constitute the long chain fatty acids, condensing enzyme elongates fatty acids. Basically gorillas have enzymes that catalyze the synthesis of unsaturated C16 long fatty acids and to a lesser extent C18. And those with low desaturation agree. So there's gene, this is so much more complicated than people make it out. Wait, sorry. Go back up to the top. Longation of very long chain fatty acids, protein 6 organism, western lowland gorilla, gene ELOVL6. I mean, this is something I just found. I don't understand what this has to do with. I'm just, I'm just making, I'm just making, I'm just saying, I'm just saying that you're saying that we shouldn't consume long chain fatty acids, but gorillas produce long chain fatty acids in their guts. So let me move on to something more. Well, wait, wait. That didn't have anything to do with them producing long chain fatty acids in their gut. I think my point is that gorillas produce, my point is that gorillas produce long chain fatty acids in their bodies and humans don't have the capability. So we do. So do we. Humans don't have the capability. Humans are not able to produce, humans cannot produce long chain fatty acids by gut fermentation. Okay. Well, that's that study you just linked. It had nothing to do with gut fermentation. My point is that ruminant animals have digestive capabilities. We're not ruminants. Long chain fatty. Yes, that is my point. We were not ruminants. My point is that ruminants are obtaining long chain fatty acids through their digestion, yet you're saying we shouldn't. Wait, wait. You're saying ruminant animals like horses and cows can, can produce long chain fatty acids through gut fermentation. No, their guts ferment it into certain chain fatty acids and then various enzymes that they produce because they have these enzymes and we don't change that into long chain fatty acids. Okay. So you're saying humans cannot produce long chain fatty acids on a run. Humans cannot ferment long chain fatty acids from plants. Okay. That's my point. So wait, why does that matter? I still haven't seen any evidence that ruminant animals even produce long chain fatty acids through like fermentation of fiber. You've just shown me one study on gorillas and gorillas aren't ruminants, by the way, and they have a gene that helps them produce long chain fatty acids. And if you read the abstract of the study, that was in relation to them just being able to create things like cell membranes. That's not a study. That's a, that's a mechanism of a gene. Right. Okay. That has nothing to do with fermentation. I don't, I don't want adults, I don't want adults much on this point. I think I made my point. You didn't really make a point. I didn't. We know that Omega-6 vegetable oils are a driver of coronary heart disease, but you're not recommending that, that we consume them. Yeah. I generally recommend staying away from like heated vegetable oils and just vegetable oil in general. Okay. Wait, go back to that previous study, Frank, about the heated vegetable oils. I mean, that wasn't, I mean, you don't, I'm not really going to make a point on this. So what did it, so what did it say? The other one, it was the other one, I think, the next one you moved to. This one? Yeah, I think. Okay. The point is that if you increase the intake of high linoleic vegetable oils and reduce animal fats, it increases all cause mortality and cardiovascular disease risk. Okay. Wait, this was from 2016. No, so no randomized control trials have been performed to prove the above interpretation. However, the opposite types of RCTs have been performed by increasing the intake of high linoleic vegetable oils and reducing that of animal fats, which resulted in increased CVD and all cause mortality. Okay. So, all right, you are aware that the American Heart Association did just come out with a report suggesting that based on the most recent randomized control trials, replacement of saturated fat with high poly and monounsaturated fats reduces all cause mortality risk, including cardiovascular disease mortality. Can you name a food that has poly and monounsaturated fat without saturated fat present? Okay. Well, that's not exactly the issue, Frank. How am I supposed to obtain nutrition from poly and monounsaturated fats? Well, the main issue is consuming too much saturated fat from animal sources and switching it over to plant sources of fat. There aren't really that many plant sources of fat that are very high in saturated fat. Most of the plant foods you mentioned do have high amounts. I mean, they have some degree of saturated fat. And if you're saying that poly-unsaturated and monounsaturated fats are good for you, saturated fats are bad, then what about... Okay. Well, Frank, tell me, does a block of cheese have more saturated fat than a cup of hemp seeds? Well, the point is what the food, the omega-3 to omega-6 ratio of the food determines the poly to monounsaturated fat ratio. Right, okay. So, if you're going to argue that, this doesn't make sense to me because you're arguing that we should consume monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats, but you can't consume them without consuming saturated fat, and but it's okay to consume short chain saturated fats? This doesn't make any sense to me, but okay. Frank, Frank, here's the thing. You want to lower saturated fat intake, increase poly and monounsaturated fat intake. Plant sources of fat like hemp seeds, walnuts, flax seeds, pistachios, they have less saturated fat than cheese. Okay? So, that's basically the general guideline that the American Heart Association is going with, and that's based on the most recent randomized control trials. So, is that like, do you understand that? Yeah, you're just not showing me any evidence that... Just you keep relaying this back to the food, but you're not showing any evidence that any specific food is a problem. You're just trying to claim that saturated fat's the problem. Okay, so dietary fats and cardiovascular disease, a presidential advisory from the American Heart Association. You can link all the studies you want, but this is not... Listen, listen, listen. Let's, let me see. So, the effects of dietary saturated fat intake and its replacement by other fats of... So, sorry, sorry. In summary, randomized control trials that lowered intake of dietary saturated fat and replaced it with polyunsaturated vegetable oil reduced CVD by 30%, similar to the reduction achieved by statin treatment. And it goes on to talk about how this actually has a significant effect on cardiovascular disease mortality. Okay, I'm looking at this, but this is not a study. Okay, well, wait a second. Well, wait a second. No, it's not a study. It's basically, it's essentially a meta-analysis, but in summary, randomized control trials that lowered intake of dietary saturated fat and replaced it with polyunsaturated vegetable oil reduced cardiovascular disease by 30%. So, this isn't a 30% reduced risk by... This has actually reduced the rate of cardiovascular disease by 30%. That's not a study. Well, no, this is an, like this is basically a meta-analysis. Okay, so hold on. Let me find something one second. And I'll just link it in the chat here. So, everyone can... So, if you want the link, Frank. Also, you... No, I have it, but here's a picture of me eating a steak. As you can see, I am slightly happy. Because I am slightly happy, eating steak is good for you. Thank you. I don't know what point you're trying to make. What point are you trying to make, Frank? No, I'm saying I'm happy eating a steak. So, since I'm happy eating a steak, steak must be good for me, right? Okay, so that's a well-being, right? So, I guess what Frank's getting at is, Richard, there's a lot of talk about well-being and... No, what I'm getting at is, if you show me an opinion piece, that doesn't have any information that I can analyze. It doesn't matter. What you're saying is, this is what you're saying. My buddy Jack told me that reducing saturated fat reduces heart disease by 30%. That's what you're telling me. Frank, if you go down, Frank, if you go down and read that entire paper, you can see the studies they're referencing. I do have, off the top of my head, I remember reading that study a couple of months ago and looking into the studies. And the assumption was that, if you reduce saturated fat in your diet, it reduces risk by 30%. But the study was actually done on cholesterol levels. So, this is what they did. If you replace animal fats with polyunsaturated fats, you will reduce your cholesterol by 30%. That was their basis. But what they drew that conclusion from was a relative risk of 1.3 in a study. They did it. That study showed a relative risk of 1.3 in that, the change in cholesterol. But a relative risk of 1.3 is below, it doesn't account for confounding factors. Okay, Frank. So, that study are on false assumptions. Frank, I really have no idea of what you're talking about because you're jabbering about complete nonsense. That doesn't make any sense. Okay. Let's see if the chat thinks that. Okay. So, anyway, if you want to actually look at some of the trials, clinical trials that use polyunsaturated fat replace saturated fat, reduce the incidence of CVD. Right. Okay. Explain to us what relative risk is because I don't think you understand what it is. Relative risk ratio? Explain what a relative risk is. It's demonstrating in the study, whatever they do, what it changes. So, if you have 100 people that eat, well, let's do 200. If you have a group of 200 people, 100 of them eat animal fat, 100 of them reduce their animal fat consumption by 20%. If there is an effect in 20% of that population or whatever the degree of change is, that's what the relative risk is looking at. So, if 20% more people have whatever association you're looking for, cardiovascular disease, if 20% more people have that in your study, then it's going to be a relative risk of 1.2. Okay. That's a very bad definition of relative risk. It's a pretty bad one, but it's... In epidemiology, risk ratio means the probability of an outcome. And so, for example, if a relative risk ratio of one, that means... You're reading that off your notebook, buddy. Sorry? Yeah. You're reading that off your notebook. So, that means if you have a relative risk of one, that means the exposure doesn't affect the outcome. So, basically, if we reduced saturated fat intake and it caused a heart attack risk ratio of one, that means the exposure reducing saturated fat didn't increase the... Didn't do anything. Didn't affect the outcome. Yeah, I said that five minutes ago. Okay. So, a relative risk ratio below one means that the exposure did affect the outcome and it reduced the frequency of occurrence of that outcome. So, I assumed that they increased saturated fat. That's why I was saying the inverse is reversed. But that doesn't really matter because they still found inverse associations on other aspects of the trial. I don't really... I mean, I don't want to waste any more time on this. Wait. There are no clear effects on stroke risk. Yeah. Okay. And those randomized control trials concluded that, yes, reducing saturated fat and replacing it with polyunsaturated fat reduced heart disease risk and risk of both fatal and non-fatal heart attack. So, that's what that paper showed. That's what all the evidence suggests so far. And that's what the statement that was just put out by the American Heart Association was based on. If the relative risk doesn't exceed a certain number, it doesn't account for other confounding factors in the lifestyle. No, no, no. No, that's not what it means. I'm not saying what anything means. I'm saying what relative risk constitutes. And I'm also saying that there were inverse associations with heart disease as well. They found people that had higher rates of heart disease when they reduced their animal saturated fat consumption. And there's both sides of the coin. That's actually the number one kind of heart disease among... So, people that consume... So, you're saying that people that consume saturated fat from red meat have higher rates of heart disease? Okay, well, vegans have lower rates of heart disease than meat eaters, typically. And I'd say, yeah, like based on what, one of the Harvard cohort studies on meat and mortality, red meat was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, including heart disease. So, you have a study showing that moderate red meat consumption causes heart disease? Let me... Okay, so I don't have this pulled up right now. Let me see if I can just quickly find it. Red meat and mortality results from two-perspective cohort studies. So, conclusions. Red meat consumption is associated with an increased risk of total cardiovascular disease and cancer mortality. Okay, isn't this epidemiology? That's epidemiology, right? Yes, yes, but again, if we go to the... So, if we go to the hierarchy of evidence here, look, we don't really need mechanistic data to really prove a point. And all Frank was asking me to do was show evidence if there's an actual study showing an association between red meat intake and increased risk of cardiovascular disease. And that's what the study found. So, red meat, including both fresh and processed meat, was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, including cardiovascular disease and cancer, and replacement of red meat with pretty much any other food source. They actually did a risk reduction analysis. I think that's what it is. So, if you replace red meat with fish, poultry, nuts, legumes, low-fat dairy, and whole grains, you will... That does correspond with reduced risk of 7% to 19% lower risk of mortality. I think that's all-cause mortality. Yeah, so... Now, I know this isn't my debate, but epidemiology... To say that epidemiology is valid and it's great, and it's the best thing. Dr. Joe Kahn was kind of using that same argument, right? Well, look, epidemiology isn't perfect. There are drawbacks, but you need epidemiology for a few things. Like, you can't just rely on mechanistic data. We got really bogged down in that last section. Just a waste of fucking time. No, Frank, let's go back to... Let's finish this off with more of a structured format. This is the Netherlands Coal Heart Study. This study demonstrated that cancer cases were highest among vegetarians and pescatarians, 11%. And significantly decreased with increased meat intake, one day per week to 7%. And two to five days of meat consumption per week to 5%. And then six to seven days per week to 4%. This was... This is the Netherlands Coal Heart Study Meat Investigation Coal Heart, Population-Based Coal Heart. Overrepresented with vegetarians, pescatarians, and low meat consumers. So did this actually have a vegan diet group? It had a vegetarian diet group, yes. Well, that's not the same thing as vegan. Let me double check if it was... Well, I don't think Frank's arguing specifically against vegan. I think he's arguing for the animal inclusive diet. These people... The point is these people removed. These were vegetarians. So... And then when they increased meat consumption in their diet, their cancer rates were reduced. What I want to touch... I mean, we touched on how... What plant foods would humans have had access to before 10,000 years ago? But there's no answer for that. We know that on both ends. So let me just talk on... I'm going to talk for the next few minutes on the bioavailability and explain why certain nutrients aren't available in a... Okay, great. ...face diet. Just let me interject here. I've seen you make this argument a lot about bioavailability. Why don't you just skip all that and show whether or not... Oh, no, no, no, no. This is kind of important. I only have like 30 more minutes left to... I will sum up my argument in like four minutes. Let Richard... Let him make his argument and then you can... Richard, piece by piece... I'd rather you just... I've heard this before. I'd rather you just show the data showing that vegans do, in fact, have higher rates of deficiency rather than talking about bioavailability. It's totally besides the point. I can show you... If you... Look, Richard, I think a better way to go about it, just respectfully, a better way to go about it was let him make his points and then you can pick it apart point by point if you think you can and make your points after. Well, I'd rather him just skip to the actual important bit that vegans do, in fact, have higher rates of deficiency. Well, he didn't say that yet. You're assuming what he's going to say. Let's let him make his argument, please. I've heard him do this. I know, but it's fine. But I want to give him five to 10 minutes. I wanted to make this as fair as possible. I'm just saying I don't have much time left and I'd rather him just hurry up and get to the actual important part. But what's important is what the argument he wants to make. So let's let him make his argument. I just want to let him make the argument. Sure, go ahead. Try to be respectful to everybody and then you can make your argument and he won't interrupt. Sure, go ahead. All right, please. I'm just going to mute you respectfully, muting you. I know you can unmute because I did that to you on your stream. All right, man. Okay, wait. Can you mute him? I'm not... I got five more minutes. I'm not listening. I'm going to take my headphones out. Richard, come on, man. We got to let's let him finish, man. No, no, Frank. Look, no, no, Frank. We got to let him finish and then you can make all your points. No, I don't have to let him finish. You can make all your points after he finishes. Please, Richard. He's wasting my time. I want to get to the important part. He keeps talking about phytates and how to inhibit absorption. So then you get to refute it after. No, show me the data showing that vegans have a higher rates of vitamin and mineral deficiencies. Let him finish his points and then you can make the points. Then you got to let him... Because I have to get to my end argument. Richard, you can make your point afterwards, man. Please, please. Let's just give him five more minutes and then you make your points and you can... If you want to refute that point, refute it, man. Yeah, but what I'm asking is what are the metrics for deficiency? Well, that's... What levels determine the deficiency? What are they using? Okay, well, you can read... I'm assuming it's the standard for blood work in Switzerland. So do you have any data showing that vegans have a significantly increased risk of vitamin A deficiency? Vitamin A deficiency? No, I can show you five mechanisms that literally prove that absorption. No, no, no. I don't care about mechanisms. That doesn't matter. Do you have any evidence that shows vegans are at higher risk of vitamin A deficiency? Do you want me to... I mean, I made my point on the vitamin A absorption. Well, no... I'm going to take a minute to show... I literally don't care about mechanisms. Show me whether or not... So why don't the mechanisms of how your body absorbs carotene matter? It doesn't matter if vegans are at a higher risk of vitamin A deficiency. So show us whether or not... Who is dictating that they're deficient? Who is dictating that they're deficient? You are claiming that vegans cannot get an adequate amount of a certain... No, I mean like what... Who determines what level of vitamin A means deficiency? It doesn't matter. Show me any study where that is reported. Show me any study where that is reported. My point... Show me any study where it was reported that vegans have a higher rate of vitamin A deficiency. Let me just jump in here real quick. So you want to see studies... You're saying that only the studies matter and Frank's saying look, the mechanisms are very important. The mechanisms matter. Because we're looking at actual health outcomes. If you can't actually show health outcome data, then that doesn't matter. You can talk about mechanisms all you want. If the health outcome data isn't any different, then the mechanisms don't matter. And according to the study, based on whatever standard they consider deficient, vegans were not at a higher risk of deficiency for vitamin A. So can you show me one single study that is reported? Vegans have higher rates of vitamin A deficiency. That wasn't my point. My point was... No, my point was that the RDAs might not be correct. And the reference ranges for what we're discussing might not be correct. Because the vitamin D3 RDA is incorrect. The vitamin D RDA isn't right. Okay, whatever. There are also RDAs... So what? What does that have to do with vegan versus vegetarian? Because there are also other RDAs that are not established like vitamin K that we know are vital for human health. The point is that the standards of deficiency that you're going by, they're open to human error and they are just for preventing deficiencies. They have nothing to do with ideal human health. So do you have any evidence at all that vegans have a higher risk of vitamin A deficiency? Or vegans tend to have a vitamin A status that is below ideal. And omnivores, they tend to have a vitamin A status that... The overarching point is that just because vegans aren't deficient in vitamin A doesn't mean that those are ideal levels. And I'm not saying that even the average person has adequate vitamin A levels. I'm saying that the metric you are using for vitamin A is so abysmally low that it doesn't matter in the context of a vegan diet. Okay, where's the evidence that the metric in the study, where they defined deficiency, that's abysmally low? I'll explain my point one more time. You didn't make a point. I didn't make a point. I went over the conversion rates of carotene. I went over that they're inhibited by gene polymorphisms. And I also went over that the flavonoids and the antioxidants inhibited the enzyme. So you're saying if I drink antifreeze and it converts to oxalic acid in my body and I die, that that's not a mechanism that matters? I just have to show the outcome that I died? That's a health outcome. What do you mean? Frank, we're not talking about antifreeze. We're talking about vitamin and nutrient status. Well, no, I mean, oxalic acid is why you die from antifreeze. Okay, so if I eat broccoli, am I going to die? Because it's the same thing as antifreeze? Like what do you... Point is the toxicity of oxalates in the body and what they do. Well, broccoli doesn't, broccoli is very low oxalate. Spinach is very high oxalate, but broccoli is pretty low. How about this, Frank? Can you show me an association between bean and legume consumption, which is really high in phytates and increased risk of all-cause mortality? Here's a paper from The Lancet. Huge meta-analysis. The Lancet. We got the rich billionaire vegan girl funding the study. No, yeah, quiet. So here's a meta-analysis from The Lancet, carbohydrate quality and human health, a series of systematic reviews and meta-analysis. What they found was after... So this included 135 million person years of data from 185 prospective studies, 85 clinical trials with 4,635 adult participants. What they found was fiber intake massively reduced risk of all-cause mortality, type 2 diabetes, and even certain forms of cancer and also heart disease. So these high fiber foods like whole grains, oats, beans, lentils, green vegetables, they're all associated with decreased rates of all-cause mortality, including heart disease, diabetes, cancer. So if these foods that are so high in anti-nutrients oxalates are so bad for you, why can't you show me any health outcome data showing that eating these foods increases risk of all-cause mortality? You can't. And that's because there is no data showing that. All you do is mislead people by just talking about this... I can't show you that. I can't show you that. Let him show it. Richard, let's give him a couple minutes. Let's give him like a minute or two. Let me make... I'll make one quick point in about two minutes, okay? But it's got to be... Let's not go on tangent points. I won't. Respond to Richard's thing and stay on point. And Richard, please don't interrupt, man. If you can. I have to leave in like two minutes. Okay. It'll be less than two minutes. So we know phytic acid can chelate things like zinc and lower zinc in the body. Okay, great, great. What's the evidence? Show me the study showing that these foods... Are you going to let me go for two minutes or are you just going to postpone me so you don't have to respond to the point? You're just... You're talking about bullshit. I have to leave in two minutes. You don't know what my point is. You're not making a point. I need health outcome data. Anything that comes out of your mouth is completely irrelevant. Show me the research. Richard, let's let him make a point. I have a study I'm going to show. I'm explaining this for the chat. I'm not explaining this for you. I'm explaining this partially for the chat as well. We are not the only people in this conversation. Frank, you shouldn't even be talking. Just find the study and put it on screen. I have a study I will show right now. Phytic acid inhibits zinc absorption. Zinc deficiency. Great, great, great. Convection to disease and mortality in the developing world. Great, not health outcome data. Great. Hold on, Richard. Let's... I'm going to mute you for a second. Let him finish, Richard, please. Okay, dude. No, no, I'm done. I'm done. The debate's over. I have to leave. I have to get work done. So thanks for having me. That's not health outcome data, Frank. I'll just say that. I asked you to show... I asked you to show data showing consumption of beans, greens, legumes, nuts, seeds, green vegetable consumption, if that's associated with all kinds of... I'm sorry. I don't just read abstract studies. I actually try to understand what goes on in the body. Thank you. You failed. Thanks. So thanks for the debate. Are you... Richard, are you done? Hey, man, do you have a closing statement before you leave? Do you have a closing statement? No, there's no closing statement. Frank is... Like, you're ridiculous. You lie. You make up bull crap. So thank you for this.