Vegan Lies and their Stick Figure People

A mixed bag of dishonesty and fraud

You’ve seen me poke fun at the monkey enviers before — though monkeys don’t have bananas delivered by the truckload — and this shall be no exception.

So one of the Vegan Menace shitheads (Durianrider of the 30 Bananas a Day crowd) goes and does just what you’d expect any shithead to do: takes a page from the dying, mainstream media playbook and does a hit piece on various well-known low-carb and Paleo diet advocates. It’s 22 minutes of pretty much pure rubbish.

Turns out, surprise surprise, that not everyone out there maintains a body fat percentage in the single digits. Of course, he picks & chooses "carefully" (that is, to support what I call lying by context). For instance, while the subject matter is "paleo," he includes a mixed bag of photos of various authorities in the field of diet and only one of them is actually a paleo advocate, Loren Cordain. The others are various low-carb, WAPF, and Zone advocates. And frankly, while I have always maintained that Cordain is a hero to the movement, his saturated fat phobia is very unpopular amongst most Paleos I know. The underlying dishonest and manipulative device is that he’s "exposing" paleo as something that will "make you fat" because the folks pictured aren’t ripped, instead sporting what could be considered average body composition for healthy men & women (~15-20% and 20-25% BF, respectively) who aren’t concerned with being ripped & shredded.

And while he does mention Mark Sisson of Mark’s Daily Apple and Sean Croxton of Underground Wellness, he includes no photo of Sisson and chooses a photo of Sean’s head only, drinking a beer. I found this photo of Sean in about 5 seconds.

Sean Croxton
Sean Croxton

Here’s Sean’s take on the affair from his blog. An excerpt:

As usual, he cherry-picked his “overweight low-carb/Paleo” pictures and left out guys like Robb Wolf, Mark Sisson, Art Devany, and myself, who can certainly get our Chippendale on if we really wanted to. He even went so far as to leave a comment (posted below) accusing Mark of using HGH and Art of using steroids. This is utterly ridiculous and defamatory, in my opinion. It’s as if all fit meat eaters over 50 are juicing (and not the kind with the fruits and veggies).

And just go to MDA to see many photos of a ripped, washboard abs Mark Sisson. And how about all the various Crossfit websites all over the net, most of which have photos of clients? Where are the photos of those paleo adherents?

So that was the first part. The second part involves criticizing these folks (primarily Sisson) for their lack of "dietary purity," i.e., for incorporating things like coffee, wine, dark chocolate, protein powder, canned sardines, fish oil caps, etc. Well, individually, anyone can take paleo as pure as they’d like and a lot go pretty pure. I commend them on their individual choice, approach and ultimately success in finding what works for them, combined with the level of commitment they’re individually comfortable with. After all, in self-experimenting and seeing the results in themselves — results as are demonstrated continually on my Real Results pages and Sisson’s Success Stories pages — they have become authorities in themselves and on themselves. How it is that some vegan shithead knows what’s best for them?

Now, I happen to be an FOS (friend of Sisson). We’ve spoken on the phone many times about this whole paleo / Primal thingy and so I know first hand what Mark is up to: maximum inclusiveness. He knows very well that in promoting his 80/20 rule (80% compliant, 20% a mixed bag of non-paleo/primal or "cheats") that he casts the widest possible net for those who are simply never going to make it if all they can do is source local grassfed and pastured animal products, local organic vegetables & fruits, exclude all dairy, and drink only water. Hats off to anyone who makes those choices for themselves and it may even be optimal for most to go that way, but I for one think that every percentage point of purity one strives for above 80-90% compliance ushers in increasing levels of diminishing returns.

Face it, if you’re going to operate a paleo blog or consult clients and insist that supermarket meat is "poison," that a trip to Mc Donald’s now and then is going to kill you after it makes you very sick, you are going to have a very small audience. Fine, if that’s what you want, but then please don’t even imply that you are anywhere near as valuable to the general movement as a Mark Sisson. It’s simply not true in any context.

But we shouldn’t expect anything different from the vegan Menace. After all, the dietary part of it is only a front for the underlying ideology which, to sum it up, is essentially the hating of humanity for being human.

Vegetarians, and their Hezbollah-like splinter-faction, the vegans, are a persistent irritant to any chef worth a damn.

To me, life without veal stock, pork fat, sausage, organ meat, demi-glace, or even stinky cheese is a life not worth living.

Vegetarians are the enemy of everything good and decent in the human spirit, an affront to all I stand for, the pure enjoyment of food. The body, these waterheads imagine, is a temple that should not be polluted by animal protein. It’s healthier, they insist, though every vegetarian waiter I’ve worked with is brought down by any rumor of a cold. 

Anthony Bourdain

The final part of this video takes dishonesty and manipulation in the other direction by showing various pictures of various "vegan" athletes with various degrees of impressive body composition. The thing is, I simply don’t believe it. If they’re claiming they got that way on a pure raw vegan diet, they’re lying. In manny photos, the lean mass pictured is simply impossible on a diet consisting primarily of fruit, as this particular sect of the vegan Menace advocates. Whether they’re getting the high protein needed for that level of lean mass from various powders or sneaking meat and other animal products when no one is looking I don’t know, but they’re getting it somehow.

Here’s the deal. It’s pretty hard to take a ripped and strong paleo and say, "yea, but you got that lean mass and strength from sneaking Mc Donald’s, pizza and Hot Pockets." It’s not necessary. Nor would it make any sense to say, "well, obviously, you’re a raw vegan and are lying about it. You can’t be eating lots of meat." But because of the profoundly unnatural way the vegan catechism works, the inverse does not hold true at all. It’s very easy for these ripped guys with substantial lean mass to claim they’re vegan (popularity mongers) and then chow down on meat & whey powder in the privacy of their own homes for even more popularity and guru status, especially for their primary prey: impressionable, irrationally exuberant young women with shriveled brian mass.

…Closet meat eaters. It makes a big difference.

At any rate, here’s the vegan body compositions not shown on the video, to come full circle on the dishonest manipulation and scam of the thing, for the benefit of shriveled brains that just can’t know any better. Click for the full size version.

Stick Figure People
Vegan Stick Figure People

Many of you might recall where these clips came from when I poked fun at vegan elitists back here.

In the end, this is about dishonesty, manipulation, and downright fraud for the purpose of promoting an anti-human ideology. First you have their bullshit, easily exposed lies about how the human digestive tract is herbivorous, that meat rots in the gut, that we don’t have killing weapons as carnivores do (we have big brains; that’s our killing weapon, dumbshits), that vegan B12 deficiency doesn’t exist and is of no concern, and on and on. And even when they do acknowledge evolution as having some authority in the diet, it is to highlight various primates. Depending on which particular species of primate you’re talking about, divergence into hominoids happened from about 5-30 million years ago.

Paleos, on the other hand, are focussed on what happened once hominoids emerged and what drove that emergence. Most likely, it was the scavenging of carnivore kills. That is, just as we observe chimps killing and eating smaller primates today (and sometimes their own species) and using tools like sticks to dig and rocks to crush, these same crushing methods were probably used to get at the big-bone marrow and high-fat brains inside skulls…and the rest is history. Once these primates were able to access highly dense nutrition, a metabolically costly big gut became less and less necessary while a big brain became increasingly advantageous. So, to balance this out metabolically, according to both Kleiber’s Law and The Expensive Tissue Hypothesis, our primate ancestors’ guts shrank over millions of years and their brains grew such that hominoids emerged. Moreover, modern humans have the exact same metabolic rate, pound for pound, as any primate ancestor, but with inverse metabolic costs associated with guts and brains. Only evolution can account for this and only by the increasing access to high density animal nutrition — first from scavenging and eventually, cunning brains that could hunt, trap, and kill prey and then finally, cooking to extract even more nutrition from less food.

Simply stated, no longer did we need to sit about eating fucking bananas all day long. Durianrider in that video above boasts of eating up to 70 bananas a day (30 just isn’t enough, I guess). Now think about that. Assume he sleeps only an average of 6 hours per night, leaving 18. That means that during that time, he has to eat 4 bananas an hour, or one every 15 minutes — for 18 hours.

…Well, I told you he’s a dumbshit. He could get far more nutrition in two 15-30 minute sessions per day on good helpings of meat, fish and vegetables. Hey, go ahead and toss in a banana or two per day and leave the other 68 bananas for the 5-30 million year old evolutionary ancestors.

In the end, this is just pitiful. It’s so unscientific; hell, anti-scientific — to go right along with the anti-humanity. These people or, perhaps more accurately, retro-humans — WAY retro — must be feeling the pinch of the totally sensible and successful paleo movement. Hell, even Dr. Oz gets it mostly right. You’ve come a long way, baby!

Update: Here’s a short video of stick-figure-man, Durianrider himself, getting his monkey on and no, I don’t mean masturbating in public. So, it’s work safe.

Alright, now go get on those Facebook and Twitter buttons at the top and get to ruffling feathers partout!

Memberships are $10 monthly, $20 quarterly, or $65 annually. The cost of two premium coffees per month. Every membership helps finance the travel to write, photo, and film from interesting places and share the experiences with you.


  1. Jason Sandeman on February 26, 2011 at 11:31

    Richard – AMEN! I did a piece on this sack of vegetable shit as well:

    Hop on over and see if you likey!

    • Richard Nikoley on February 26, 2011 at 12:15

      I’m proud to have that link in the comments, Jason. Sometimes you just gotta let loose.

      • Jason Sandeman on February 26, 2011 at 13:34

        Thank you Richard! I have you to thank… er… blame. LOL You have this influence on people… :)

  2. Kyle Bennett on February 26, 2011 at 12:22

    I met the living embodiment of vegan reductio ad absurdum on Facebook recently. He said it is unethical to eat honey because it is *stealing* from “sentient” bees. And the fact that a bee may get crushed during harvesting just put it over the top into the most evil oppression imaginable. He’s feeding his dog vegan now, because domestic animals have no “excuse” for harming other “sentient” species.

    • Travis on February 26, 2011 at 12:32

      Anyone who tries to turn a dog into a vegan should have it taken away and then be charged with cruelty.

      • Jeanmarie on February 26, 2011 at 21:05

        Amen to that!
        And especially don’t let vegans raise children, please.

    • Ann Marie @ CHEESESLAVE on February 26, 2011 at 16:27

      I knew a vegan who told me she didn’t eat honey because “The bees are oppressed.”

      She really said that.

      • Johnnyv on February 27, 2011 at 14:59

        Best response: Laughter followed by “Oh wait you’re serious? Let me laugh even harder!”
        Bender from Futurama style.

    • Ruben on February 27, 2011 at 23:57

      Try living with someone like that for a decade. :( Another bizarre thing: going on a day trip to London (from mainland Europe) to buy vegan Doc Martens, and not seeing anything wrong with that.

  3. Canibais e Reis » Blog Archive » “Vegan Lies and their Stick Figure People”, mais falácias veganas para entreter o povo on February 26, 2011 at 13:50

    […] Vegan Lies and their Stick Figure People […]

  4. Don Matesz on February 26, 2011 at 14:37

    Dr. Oz still repeats that stupid “stone agers only lived to 25 years of age” bullshit. He worries bout leaving out whole grains — that’s going to do what? His healthy whole grain diet didn’t protect him from a colon cancer scare:

    • Richard Nikoley on February 26, 2011 at 15:26

      Yea Don, I frankly would not have even thought about mentioning or linking to that but for a bit of saving grace in how he followed that up with ‘but they were healthy and if they made it past a certain point they lived long, healthy lives,’ and he even said ‘without the benefit of modern medicine’ which is a pretty impressive admission I have to give him some props for.

      A bit at a time.

      The gist I got out of the grains part is that it would be hard to follow because it’s such a big part of our diet. That I chalk up to just ignorance. I don’t have hard data but I suspect sugar it the harder thing to give up for most (and of course, those so often exist in the same food so which is the thing actually causing the irresistible craving.

      Of course, at least in the people who report to you and I in comments I don’t get the sense that Paleo is hard to follow at all for a very large percentage of people. Most often, people are reporting in after months already of successful compliance, affirming their commitment to make it a permanent part of their lives.

      Well, given all the crap I’ve heard from Oz over the years and I’m sure we’ll hear much more I’m counting this a small step in the right direction.

      • gallier2 on February 27, 2011 at 01:31

        It”s funny when one considers where this whole grain trope comes from. At the basic level it’s the same reasoning as for paleo except that they stuck half way through. The idea was that modern flours are bad because of our technology that would be so efficient that they through out all the goodness of the grains, so we must go back to a time where technology was so primitive that all grain remains whole and so be good for us. It struck the same chord as (often) paleo does (fortunatly not you or Dr.Harris), the chord of “In the past,everything was better.”
        That their reasoning was flawed on several levels didn’t matter, it appealed to emotion and people then adopted a diet that was less tasty, higher in price but cheaper to produce. No wonder that the industry endorsed it wholeheartedly. It stuck also because it appealed to the same puritan anti-human tendency that veganism shows us here, personal pain to gain redemption. This religious dimension is also a reason why veganism and whole grains ideology are more pronounced in protestant countries (US, GB, North-Germany, Netherlands etc.) than in traditionally catholic ones (France, Italy, Belgium, South-Germany etc.)

      • Brian Scott on February 27, 2011 at 12:54

        While I’m going to agree with you on the anti-human nature of Puritanic Protestant Christianity, I’m going to say that Catholicism has just as much of a guilt complex. :P I just think Catholics are more sensible; that entire “fasting on Fridays during lent” thing may have silly motivation but hey, it’s still intermittent fasting.

      • gallier2 on February 27, 2011 at 13:17

        The advantage catholic have, is that they can have absolution even if they “sin”, a concept abhorrent to puritans. This allows to enjoy the good sides of life without to much of trouble. This does encourage hypocrisy though.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 13:41

        Not entirely true, Gallier2. The Evangelical or “born again” sect of Protestantism hold that once you are saved, i.e., say some magical words about “trusting Jesus as your personal Lord & Savior,” all sins past, present and future are paid for and absolved. In fact, explicitly, there is no sin you can commit that’s not forgiven. Explicitly, there is no work or good deed you can do to earn your way into heaven. You must trust that it is only the death of the innocent Christ on the cross (Lamb of God) and your absolute trust in his payment for your sins and not your own works that saves you.

        So, you basically have the same problem as you’ve noted. Whether one obtains absolution in a phone booth or, direct to Jesus with magic words, it cheapens life on Earth. You can be forgiven, no matter what. So, you get various unintended consequences, such as priests molesting altar boys, evangelical youth pastors having a grand ole’ time with the church youth — typically females, and evangelical pastors having affairs with (typically) female members of the congregation, married and unmarried.

        I’ve told my family and others many times since I went heathen (atheist) in 1990: It had the effect of making my acts, good or bad, right here on little ole’ Earth far more important and consequential.

        Judge, and prepare to be judged: NOW, not in some imaginary afterlife.

      • gallier2 on February 27, 2011 at 14:02

        Ok, I’m no expert, especially on these american christianist sects. As for your remark about atheist, it’s absolutelt right and i’s a thing that believers never understand, atheists are normally more responsible for their acts, there’s only our own conscience to live with.

      • Brian Scott on February 27, 2011 at 14:14

        Eh, I’m gonna have to partially disagree with you on the “phone booth” comment. While you’re right that you have to acknowledge how your actions affect people in the real world, the Catholic idea of absolution is recognition that humans do make make mistakes and must acknowledge them. Far better that someone genuinely acknowledges their mistakes and work to correct them than to live as a permanent pariah with no redemption to work towards. If you want to blame things like child abuse in the church on something, blame it what’s actually happening: not acknowledging mistakes and instead justifying them, and protecting the organization at the expense of individual members (and outsiders).

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 14:25

        A conciliatory distinction on my part is that having grown up with and around the born agains and now, having a number of close friends who practice Catholicism to various degree, as well as my wife’s entire family, I can say without a doubt that man on the street Catholicism is light years more rational than the fundamentalist sects of Christianity.

        No comparison. Essentially, it’s the difference between a culture and a cult. And I mean that most sincerely. I can’t recall ever meeting or knowing a Catholic where their Catholicism much or at all interfered with normal social behavior. The born agains want to control your life and they go to great lengths to make their adherents feel different, apart, superior to the rest of society so as to isolate them for better influence and control.

        On the other hand, the whole priesthood with its unnatural celibacy is just a plain abomination. I just can’t understand why they don’t do away with that. And, of course their stand on condoms and such in the third world: institutional abomination.

      • Ravi on March 1, 2011 at 21:39

        this is actually very apparent living in europe amongst catholics – even still practicing ones – i think it comes down to the whole catholic ability to integrate forgiveness – doing hail marys and all – as opposed to the absolutist intolerance of puritanical america – loved when a comedian pointed out that clinton’s blow job, while almost getting him impeached in america, would have been considered good form in europe: “he got a blow job? good! he is relaxed – he can govern!”

        i was so impressed as a young naive american on my first trip to vienna – strip joints in “normal” city blocks with fine restaurants next door – just a whole different idea of tolerance and what’s “normal” human behavior.

        and yes – there is still that miserable catholic nurtured-perversion – “how do you get a nun pregnant? dress her up as an alter boy” yecht!

      • Dave Fish on February 27, 2011 at 10:01

        He even invited Gary Taubes to be on his show (I think it airs on March 7th) so I give him props for that. I hope he lets him speak instead of interrupting him constantly like he did on the Larry King show a few years back.

  5. Sue on February 26, 2011 at 20:11

    Another banana freak:

    Check out this video on YouTube:

  6. Daniel Kirsner on February 26, 2011 at 20:46

    It’s not a perfect comparison–he’s 44 now, but Mike Tyson recently made a concerted effort to get back in shape while following a vegan diet. Compared to his meat and ear-eating days, he looks…



    • William on February 27, 2011 at 17:16

      I remember Tyson being not that great of boxer. He was nothing more than a bully who eventually was seen through by a journeyman named Buster Douglas. His Che Guevara tattoo, and veganism simply verifies what a dunce he really is.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 17:25

        I remember Tyson as potentially the most devastating boxer ever. Look at that bull’s neck in the first photo.

        But everyone ought to know the rest of the story.

    • Sue on March 1, 2011 at 03:04

      Not as muscular after.

  7. Darrin on February 26, 2011 at 22:36

    To be honest, I would be surprised if these guys Durianrider holds up as veg*n superheroes are sneaking meat behind the scenes. My guess is that a whole hell of a lot of supplementation is really what makes this possible.

    In a world of ~7 billion people it really isn’t that difficult to find outliers, no matter what paradigm you’re viewing the world from. I think the results of the “Average Joes” speaks VOLUMES compared to any cherry-picked exceptions to the rule.

    The case studies I find here and MDA look far better than all the emaciated “success stories” that seem to be the par for the veg*n camp.

  8. Chris on February 26, 2011 at 10:20

    Epic. I really hope some vegans come on here and try and defend their position.

    70 bananas seriously – what a tool.

    • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 18:36

      Durian does nothing but write stupid blogs, run seminars to covert folks to eat like he does and ride his bike 8 or more hours per day. I suppose he burns up all the masses of sugar he consumes but can’t be healthy.

    • Tony on March 6, 2011 at 23:02

      Those guys look like the American POWs liberated from WWII Japanese concentration camps in the Philippines.

      • lauriegillies on April 17, 2011 at 12:01

        So true, true, true………

        The good news is that hardly any women other than anorexics will want to fuck him, and we all know their body fat level is too low to procreate…….

        So give it one generation or so, and his likes will have eliminated themselves from the gene pool……..

  9. Crystal on February 26, 2011 at 10:21

    I LOVE Anthony Bourdain! As a chef I could NOT agree more. I cure my own bacon from local pastured pork and it knocks the socks off anything it is eaten with and I would fight tooth and nail anyone who claims I cannot enjoy something as beautiful as pork belly. You cannot enjoy a meal if you feel it needs to be give the once over nitpick of ideology.

    • Ned Kock on February 26, 2011 at 17:03

      AB is also one of my favorites. I have been watching even more of his shows than Les Stroud’s Survivorman shows.

      For some reason, I find food shows quite relaxing – except for those “an this recipe has an advantage … low saturated fat” shows. A bonus is that both my wife and daughter like them too!

      One thing I don’t like so much about AB. I’ve never seen him say that a dish is bad, like the “bizarre foods” guy does often. Everything is “like a dream come true”.

      • Paleo 2.0 on February 27, 2011 at 09:09

        Bourdain didn’t really complement so much the hardly-cooked boar anus…That was pretty classic.

        He is also a great judge on Top Chef.

    • markus on June 27, 2015 at 18:14

      You are killing an animal for enjoyment. That’s the biggest problem vegans have with eating meat. Funnily enough this biggest problem at all is not even raised in the article.

      • David on November 24, 2015 at 17:40

        What about dairy or unfertilized eggs? Neither are killing an animal and yet vegans refuse to consume those things. I have no problem eating meat myself, but I can understand a moral argument at some level for vegetarian’s. But at the dairy/egg level that vegan’s demand this moves from being about morality to becoming a religion.

  10. anonymous on February 26, 2011 at 10:27

    Internet is serious business.

    Seriously, I can stomach the occasional personal diary entry on your health, but this poo-flinging isn’t interesting, compelling or useful.

    • Richard Nikoley on February 26, 2011 at 10:31

      Yea, well being an anonymous pussy is a big laugh.

      Now go fuck yourself and get off my blog and out of its comments. Not only are you not interesting, compelling or the slightest bit useful to anyone I can imagine, you’re a fuckin’ bore.

      • Sarah Ann on February 26, 2011 at 11:21

        Laughed so hard, laptop fell off my lap.

        Beautiful, perfect post. Bravo.

      • Chris on February 26, 2011 at 19:32

        BAHAHA!! Gold.

        Anyway, isn’t this just a well validated response to what was, IN THE FIRST PLACE, originally ‘poo flinging’ at not only the scientifically sound Paleo community, but unnccessary attacks on individuals? Yeah that’s right.

      • anonymous on February 27, 2011 at 04:46

        You sound like a 12-year-old on Xbox Live – while reading your entry I’m imagining the shrill pre-pubescent voice that goes along with it. How’s that for an ad hominem, something you resort to along with unnecessary rudeness while conveniently side-stepping my valid criticism.

        I started following your blog to get more information on paleo lifestyle. Recently it’s more and more about peripheral subjects, such as the deathmatch between vegetarians/vegans and paleos, spam for events, and diary entries better suited to a personal blog.

        Your blog is making paleo look like a cult.

      • rob on February 27, 2011 at 09:44

        Wtf is this the only website on the internet? Rumor has it there is something called “Google” that will pull up thousands of sites on virtually any subject, from Paleo to Cockroach Racing.

      • anonymous on February 27, 2011 at 09:53

        Yeah, I think I’m better off looking for a paleo site where visitors are treated cordially.

        Chill. Seriously.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 13:46

        “I think I’m better off looking for a paleo site where visitors are treated cordially.”

        VisitorS, or a certain anonymous visitor? The fact is, 95%+ and probably way + are treated cordially, with respect, encouragement, and whatever else I can do for them. How much I interact and to what extent is somewhat proportional to their positive contributions to this blog, contributions including rational disagreement with me, correcting an error on my part, or expanding upon what I’ve posted about.

        So, obviously, you are not to be treated cordially.

      • William on February 27, 2011 at 13:51

        “Yeah, I think I’m better off looking for a paleo site where visitors are treated cordially.”

        Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!

      • anonymous on February 27, 2011 at 14:24

        Stay classy.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 12:02

        “valid criticism”

        Let’s see:

        “this poo-flinging isn’t interesting, compelling or useful.”

        And, so you’re full of shit. First, it’s not a criticism, it’s a summary judgment. Moreover:

        …isn’t interesting, compelling or useful TO WHOM?

        See, you’re one of these silly people who thinks their own values ought to apply to everyone. You’re the type who jerks off in voting booths, salivating over the prospect of participating in the act of the bigger mob shoving their values down the throats of the smaller mob, by force, and then making them pay for it.

        See, your judgment is valid only in your own mind (which is fine & dandy, I might add), not to those representing the the 100+ comments on this post — so far — clearly attesting to the simple fact that many found the post “interesting, compelling, or useful” — or of value in some other way. Nor does it necessarily apply to the 40-50,000 unique visitors to this blog each month responsible for 120K visits and 200K + page views, though I’m sure a fair number might or would agree with you on specifics, principle or feeling. So?

        Using your brain to make critical distinctions, see? That’s why I’m the blogger and you’re not. You’re an anonymous commenter who can barely manage 3 paragraphs; and wherein, you can’t even get your logic straight.


        “I started following your blog to get more information on paleo lifestyle. Recently it’s more and more about peripheral subjects, such as the deathmatch between vegetarians/vegans and paleos, spam for events, and diary entries better suited to a personal blog.”

        Yea, I guess I should just keep trying to come up with different ways to convey the same message about saturated fat, cholesterol con, paleo principles, and whatnot that already exist in the archives in myriad ways. But I know. Your judgment applies to everyone so it just doesn’t matter that my readers tend to like the way I blog, which is why it just grows and grows. And your quip about “spam for events,” ie, the Ancestral Health Symposium, really gives a stark clue into your decrepit and bankrupt psych. Because YOU don’t care to go, then it’s “spam,” which isn’t even technically correct because IT’S MY FUCKING BLOG YOU STUPID FUCK! How does one spam by posting to his own blog?

        You don’t really have two brain cells to rub together, do you?


        “Your blog is making paleo look like a cult.”

        Setting aside the same question, TO WHOM?, the fact is that I’m one of the rare voices out there, likely the most prominent fighting against exactly that thing: dogma, reenactment, intolerance, purity, etc. But you wouldn’t know about that, wouldja?

        I could go on and on.

        In the end, you’re just an anonymous coward with a victimesque, entitlement mentality. You came here to get free information, never even considered hitting the Donate button or buying one of the books I sell as an affiliate, but you’ll damn sure tell me how I ought to run my blog.

        There’s thousands of punks like you out there, so every once in a while I feel compelled to have to point out just how rotten you are.

      • anonymous on February 27, 2011 at 16:48

        You have valid points marred by lots of assumptions, pointless ad hominems and yet more rudeness – is the American male so emasculated that there is a need to bolster your message with a stream of swear words as if to underscore your alphaness? In macho cultures that’s a sign of weakness. Anyway, measuring who’s got the bigger dick in the nutrition world, paleo dogma vs XYZ dogma, or personal health diaries don’t interest me one bit.

        I understand as a blogger you need to keep people checking back and clicking your affiliate links and your banner ads and come to your shows and click the donate button and drop your name on other blogs. Even then I’m shocked that tens of thousands do find it interesting – then again looking at a newsstand it’s clear that The Economist, FT and Foreign Affairs are far outnumbered by the likes of FHM, Cosmo, and News of the World. Believe it or not, that’s not really a put-down, just saying that there’s an audience for everything; and I’m clearly not your audience. I’m sure I won’t be missed.

        Oh, I would have specifically sought to use your affiliate links for two paleo books I’ve been looking at for my Amazon shopping cart. I always do so on blogs I frequent. ASSumptions.

      • Jason Sandeman on February 27, 2011 at 17:05

        Hey Durian – how are ya doin? Oh, maybe its not you – but it fits the MO. Something stinks here.
        You know the best thing about being a pussy? You can take pot shots from obscurity. Kind of like that emaciated twat in the video above. You know, it’s easy to go on about how your dogma is right, everyone else is wrong.
        It takes some cajones to actually make a stand and you know, put your name down. See, stand up for what you think. Stop being a fucking pussy and if you want to engage in the conversation with the adults, then by all means – do so.
        Comparing Richard to a 14 YO on XBox live is funny. See, a 14 YO would post as anonymous so they’re protected in what’s left of their giggly – pimply faced masturbating dream world.
        Drink enough cane juice, and you’ll see what I mean.
        At least we got the balls to put our name down.

      • Jason Sandeman on February 27, 2011 at 17:56

        Exactly. Too chickenshit. Err. Whateva. If you’ve never had Durian, how do you know how it smells?
        You want to engage, but have no name, email, or any way for someone to contact you. Yet, you’re cool with taking potshots. Who’s the 14 yo with the XBox live now? Grow some fur, eat some fucking meat, get a life, and quit wasting our fucking time, quaff!

      • anonymous on February 27, 2011 at 17:16

        I’ve never had durian but it sure does smell; not sure what your reference even means.

        My identity is irrelevant since I’m not in the “scene,” have no horse in the race, and I really don’t want to associate my name with this level of juvenility to protect my professional identity – again, entirely unrelated to nutrition (corporate finance).

        Funny how none of the 100+ other (pseudo-)anonymous people don’t get any shit for being anonymous.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 17:27

        They don’t get shit for good reason; for one, most of them use real email addresses, which you do not, so I can actually contact them.

        I’ll get to your other post later.

      • anonymous on February 27, 2011 at 17:45

        You can contact me right here – I have no interest in contacting you or getting contacted personally on this or any other blog I visit.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 18:01

        “I really don’t want to associate my name with this level of juvenility to protect my professional identity”

        IOW, he does, but he doesn’t. What a pussy. Slave to “professional identity.” I guess that implies that he can’t be assured that people will judge his comments as professional over my post and replies to his comments.

        Perhaps he’s scared for people to know that in comments, I OWN him. Professionalism, and all.

      • anonymous on February 28, 2011 at 02:03

        Looks like I hit a nerve.

      • Ruben on February 28, 2011 at 02:11

        Yes, the nerve that triggers my (and, apparently, our) collective stupidity detector. Your “appeal to authority to hide your identity”-argument would have faltered in a group of 8-year-olds. As if other posters are either all unemployed or are flipping burgers at this very moment.

        You may not believe it, but some people stand by what they write. It’s your choice to censor yourself. Do what makes you happy. But do I look down upon it as being cowardly? Yes, certainly. You may look down upon me as being naive. Fair’s fair. But so far I’ve never had to hide my true self to gain an extra buck, so at least for n=1 my strategy has worked.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 28, 2011 at 06:50

        “lots of assumptions”

        Yea? So welcome to the club.

        “is a need to bolster your message with a stream of swear words ”

        Of course not, but this is a stage upon which I conduct a play of sorts with myself as the main character and commenters as the remainder of the cast. And this performance is conducted in front of an audience of thousands. Simply stated, I’m using you to entertain the audience. So, thanks for playing along.

        “need to keep people checking back and clicking your affiliate links and your banner ads and come to your shows and click the donate button and drop your name on other blogs.”

        There’s a big conflation wrapped up in an assumption. First, the assumption. A blog with my kind of bandwidth draw (especially all the food images) requires expensive service. The Amazon links earn a pittance, less than $100 per month because the percentage is so low. Affiliate commissions are far better, like 30-50% and even more in some cases. This is another couple hundred bucks per month. In short, I don’t even cover hosting costs and design costs combined.

        So, making money is not equivalent to my genuine desire for traffic. Many reasons for that. Go to the Real Results category. Read some of those entries and the comments of many others who have been helped by this blog.

        “I would have specifically sought to use your affiliate links for two paleo books I’ve been looking at for my Amazon shopping cart.”

        And I would have appreciated it, regardless.

        Glad the no soap and poo thing is working for you.

      • Athonwy on February 28, 2011 at 12:38

        If you’ve ever been in the same zip code as a durian you KNOW what it smells like! There are laws in Hawai’i prohibiting bringing durian on the bus. I’ve never tasted it either, but good holy hell I know what it smells like.

      • anonymous on February 27, 2011 at 16:53

        BTW, been soap and shampoo free for almost two months, working very well and my skin is better than any time since puberty. Thanks for that. Soap on hands and ass, that’s it.

      • dee on February 15, 2012 at 10:12

        Sorry I’m with anonymous on this one. he did disagree politely in the beginning. He was upfront about not liking this post, sure, but it was still polite.

        The blogger responded like a wounded child who can’t take criticism properly.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 19, 2012 at 07:59

        Yea, and your spam has been edited to remove the URL to a site for coupons for cosmetics. -“blogger”

    • gallier2 on February 26, 2011 at 11:48

      Yeah, and for me it’s exactly the contrary, I don’t really care about his exercice (leangains) entries but love when he give hell to morons. So what should Richard do, listen to you or listen to me? In fact he should do what he always did, don’t care about the audience and write about the things he wants to. It’s his blog and if his subjects don’t interest me, then I don’t read them, it’s as simple as that.

      • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 18:04

        That’s right but I’m so glad Richard decided to write this blog about the arsehole banana dude.

      • Jason Sandeman on February 27, 2011 at 14:06

        Seriously, I love Richard’s blog all over. Do I give a shit what the other people think? Fuck no.

        The best part about the “Durian” guy is he named himself after a fruit that stinks to high heaven. Banned in a lot of places. Go figure.
        Basically, if you want to be a stupid fuck, stink like shit – (So most places will ban you) be like him. 80/10/10 VEGAN dumbass.

        How is that for cordiallity?

      • Ruben on February 27, 2011 at 23:46

        “arsehole banana dude”

        Sometimes having a very vivid imagination is not an asset. :)

  11. Melissa McEwen on February 26, 2011 at 10:39

    Harley regularly comments on the FB page of former RV Anthony Anderson, mainly to heckle him, but I am amused by the details he lets slip. Apparently he’s been snipped. Thank god! Do a google scholar search on vegan + infant + b12. Unsupplemented veganism kills. He makes the animal rights conventional vegan crowd look sane since at least they admit their diet is for the animals and supplement accordingly. But no, he and his ilk insist it’s the perfect diet in every possible way.

    He and his GF are also unemployed and have bragged about the welfare benefits they receive. Imagine them bringing a malnourished welfare state baby into the world? Thank god for vasectomies!

    • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 18:07

      Heaven forbid they had a baby. Those two make my skin crawl.

    • Dana on February 26, 2011 at 21:02

      Even if you supplement as a vegan, you can hurt yourself if you don’t know what the hell you’re doing. Like, with B12, it has to be methylcobalamin, not cyanocobalamin. The latter can mess up your ability to absorb the real stuff, and vegans have enough trouble getting enough of it as is. And like as not they’ll try to get vitamin A from beta carotene, which doesn’t work for something like 45 percent of the population, including healthy people.

      I’d be more interested in the baby being malnourished than being “welfare state.” I don’t think it quite fair to label a child that way, it’s just as bad as “illegitimate.” There are worse things to spend public money on. Worth pointing out that in a tribal environment each little nuclear family is not left to eat or starve on its merits alone–food was shared amongst the tribe’s members and people didn’t go hungry as long as hunts and foragings were successful.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if along with the economy, this dude’s and his girlfriend’s malnourishment are playing a huge role in their being unemployed. It is hard to hold on to a job when you’ve lost about 50 IQ points because you think steak is yucky.

    • damaged justice on February 27, 2011 at 07:19

      I was just going to comment above, who cares if he’s healthy or unhealthy as long as he doesn’t want the rest of us to pay his doctor bills. Of course he doesn’t have the courage to go around with a gun actually forcing us, he’ll hide behind an army and call it his fair share.

  12. Dave Fish on February 26, 2011 at 11:03

    LOVE the Anthony Bourdain quote! Hezbollah-like indeed. I’ve been banned from making any more comments on that video (@fish1962d) obviously because I was winning the debate. While I wasn’t exactly civil in my comments, I don’t think they were any worse in tone than the veggies’ comments towards me. But their comments are laughable, such as this one:

    “Carbs are essential. The body runs on glucose. In the absence of carbs it has 2convert protein at great cost into sugar. Why not just give it what it wants? The brain runs on glucose. Low carbers experience brain fog due 2the shortage of glucose & have trouble sorting fact from fiction.”

    As for the vegan body builders and MMA fighters, etc., maybe they are taking massive doses of soy protein powder or similar. Certainly it doesn’t come from eating 30-70 bananas a day. I’d be interested in finding out what they claim to eat on a regular basis to maintain their muscle mass. All the articles I’ve read have been very vague about the contents of their vegan diets.

    The one thing that video validated for me was my belief that veganism is a cult religion for the slow-witted and people like DurianRider is like Jimmy Jones or David Koresh. The vegan leaders will eventually kill their followers, just not in as dramatic a fashion.

    I read somewhere that vegans make up 0.02% of the population but are way overrepresented in the mainstream media. A regular perusal of the New York Times Health section is evidence of that. This shouldn’t come as a surprise though as the NY Times columnists in general seem to hate Americans for being American, just like veggies hate humanity for being human.

    • Theresa on February 26, 2011 at 13:11

      Dave, I’ve also seen more and more coverage of MMA fighters that claim to be vegetarian/vegan, and quite frankly, I don’t see how they could be. Mac Danzig goes in depth into what he eats on Mike Mahler’s page There appear to be some fats (he also avoids wheat), but I think he’s getting most of his protein from manufactured foods.

    • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 18:09

      Do you think also just the act of lifting weights builds substantial muscle alongside minimal protein in diet?

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 08:39


        No, I don’t think lifting weights without the protein building blocks to build muscle will do it. You simply must provide enough to not only maintain your existing lean mass, but repair and rebuild the breakdown from heavy lifting into bigger, stronger, better. Nothing else will do it.

        That’s not to say a vegan can’t. There are plenty of concentrated vegan protein sources like soy protein. But that’s not raw vegan. Absolutely no way for a raw vegan on an 80/10/10 regime could do it. The pictures above demonstrate what actually happens. They waste away their lean mass over time. Unavoidable.

      • Sue on February 27, 2011 at 15:21


      • anand srivastava on February 28, 2011 at 03:59

        There is a way, eating sprouted lentils. There are some legumes which when sprouted are not very harmful, like moong. The sprouts are high in lysine an amino acid which converts to ketones in excess. So it results in a mostly decent source of protein. Granted it will not help a diabetic, but it could be used by a milk and ghee eating vegetarian. The diet would be ok for survival even building solid muscles. It definitely will not be as good as paleo.

      • rob on February 27, 2011 at 13:20

        the act of lifting weights


        I think people can lift weights with minimal protein in their diet, 90% of the people in the gym are doing it.

        But the big question is “how much weight?”

  13. Jimmy Moore on February 26, 2011 at 11:03

    Cordain isn’t as phobic on saturated fat as many believe. Listen to my interview with him this week on my podcast to hear him address the issue head-on. DurianRider had warned me I better eat like McDougall recommends or he’s gonna put me in his next hit piece. LOL! Whatever. I have asked him in my podcast…we’re working out the details now.

    • Melissa McEwen on February 26, 2011 at 11:17

      Ack, don’t feed the troll!

      • Darrin on February 26, 2011 at 22:19

        Agreed. It’d be one thing if this guy had a logical and coherent argument, but this video just sounded like a hyperactive 8-year-old throwing a temper tantrum because Rugrats got canceled. Hilarious and ridiculous all at once, but I can’t say I’d really be interested in spending another hour listening to these emotional appeals.

      • Sean on February 26, 2011 at 13:26

        This would be more about giving someone plenty of rope . . .

      • Jimmy Moore on February 26, 2011 at 15:40

        EXACTLY! I enjoy hearing from people like this if for no other reason than the entertainment factor, Melissa. :)

      • Chris on February 26, 2011 at 19:46

        I don’t think any retort is “feeding” him at all. I’m quite happy he made this video, because honestly, he is just *seriously* embarrassing himself among the health community. Notice there are a lot more dislikes than likes on the vid? :P

  14. Kurt G Harris MD on February 26, 2011 at 11:26

    I guess I am not cut out for this work. I could only make it 2 1/2 minutes into this video.

    “Sooner or later you have to binge on ice cream to get carbohydrates.” As if ice cream isn’t mostly fat.

    And is he really an Aussie? What an annoying speaking voice.

    I’m almost 50. Every minute I waste dealing with people so stupid they would even consider veganism is just burning metaphorical dollar bills of time to no ultimate benefit.

    PS I literally have no idea who McDougal is and I am proud of that fact as he seems to be some vegan idiot.

    • Richard Nikoley on February 26, 2011 at 12:13

      Ha, Kurt.

      I’m chalking this post up to well needed TMS therapy. And it works! :)

    • Travis on February 26, 2011 at 12:24

      “Every minute I waste dealing with people so stupid they would even consider veganism is just burning metaphorical dollar bills of time to no ultimate benefit.”

      Priceless, Dr. Harris! :-)

    • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 18:13

      Yes he really is a bloody Aussie as I am. I too find his voice so annoying.

      • Chris on February 26, 2011 at 19:36

        Me too, & so do I! It just adds to the irritation of it all.

      • Len on February 26, 2011 at 23:26

        I’m Aussie, too. And his voice annoys me. The bad part is, he sounds similar to me!

      • Pelinor on February 27, 2011 at 23:37

        Have you listened to the Mrs Gilliard, the Prime Minister. she combines Welsh wjth Australian, that’s a really horrible voice.

      • Len on February 28, 2011 at 01:12

        Unfortunately I get to hear her just about every day on the radio. She actually sounds almost exactly like Kath from the parody TV show, Kath & Kim. Very grating.

  15. JK on February 26, 2011 at 11:48

    Richard, I couldn’t help but think of one of the most famous vegans of them all: good ole Gandhi. I know I’ve mentioned him before, but your indictment of vegans as hating humanity is strikingly in line with George Orwell’s argument against Gandhi’s thought. On Gandhi’s denial of this world and what this means for all humans in it, Orwell talks about how Gandhi’s veganism was anti-human:

    “The autobiography leaves it uncertain whether Gandhi behaved in an inconsiderate way to his wife and children, but at any rate it makes clear that on three occasions he was willing to let his wife or a child die rather than administer the animal food prescribed by the doctor. It is true that the threatened death never actually occurred, and also that Gandhi – with, one gathers, a good deal of moral pressure in the opposite direction – always gave the patient the choice of staying alive at the price of committing a sin: still, if the decision had been solely his own, he would have forbidden the animal food, whatever the risks might be. There must, he says, be some limit to what we will do in order to remain alive, and the limit is well on this side of chicken broth. This attitude is perhaps a noble one, but, in the sense which – I think – most people would give to the word, it is inhuman.”

    It’s obvious from the start that Orwell knew the truth about animal foods. Congrats on sounding like Orwell! The essay investigates how Gandhi’s worldview is not compatible with humanism.


    • JK on February 26, 2011 at 11:51

      I just thought I’d add how it seems that Orwell equates death with veganism and life/health with a diet inclusive of animal foods. I know he was no biologist, but the fact that animal foods promoted health seems to be taken as a given. This was from 1949.

      • Eko on February 27, 2011 at 05:40

        Nietzsche notices the fact that Vegetarianism is a cult, and how its existence casts doubt on the reliability of dietary science in “The Gay Science”. Clever guy.

    • SB on February 26, 2011 at 12:58

      Gandhi was definitely not vegan. He raised goats for milk at Sabarmati ashram.

      • JK on February 26, 2011 at 13:56

        Didn’t know that. Apparently he thought it was still wrong to consume even milk. From his autobiography: “To my mind, the life of a lamb is no less precious than that of a human being.”

      • Jorge on March 13, 2011 at 13:26

        If Ghandi really said that, the Mahatma Ghandi can officially be declared as a misanthrope and dumbfuck.

    • Dana on February 26, 2011 at 21:15

      And they say all leftists are crazy. (I laugh every time I see a right-winger or a libertarian quote George Orwell. Do they even *know*?) It’s insane how vegans have taken over the Left–at least, they seem to be the most visible, them and their ovo-lacto friends. It drives me nuts. I’m actually trying to organize lefties who are tired of being guilt-tripped over meat-eating, we’ve got a group on Facebook because I don’t see how you can malnourish people and still achieve social justice. I see groups like Plenty International out there “feeding” indigenous people by showing them how to make soymilk and I fly into a killing rage that needs no B12 deficiency to fuel it.

    • anand srivastava on February 28, 2011 at 04:09

      Gandhi and almost all Indians are not Vegan. Many of us are Lacto-Vegetarians. Eggs is not part of the Indian vegetarian diet. Fish is allowed in some areas on the coast. Milk and sun does provide whatever is missing. Unfortunately Milk is no longer what it used to be. Meat is prohibited by religion for many castes, particularly the Brahmins (the learned class) and the Vaishyas (the business class), other castes have no problem eating meat. Gandhi was a Brahmin.

      • TandooriChicken on March 4, 2011 at 12:09

        Anand, my family comes from a line of meat-eating Brahmins. The beauty of our religion is that it is largely individual; each one can follow the path that satisfies oneself. The point for me being that the Vegan Menace is anti-Hindu for presuming to pass judgement on my lifestyle. That’s what gets my blood boiling.

    • Matthew on February 28, 2011 at 12:17

      Well, after reading that. Fuck Ghandi. A human is always more important than an animal.

  16. Richard Nikoley on February 26, 2011 at 12:04

    Here we go, on the FTA Facebook Fan Page:

    Serge Sigouin “I can’t tolerate this attack against other people who try to do their best. You need help. Adios!”

    My reply:


    I assure you, Serge, the pleasure is all mine.

    You see, first I loath the hypocrisy implicit in being intolerant over another’s display of intolerance and second, the inability to make critical ethical distinctions.

    “try to do their best”

    Yea, E-fer-effort and all that other kindergarten bullshit. But perhaps you didn’t take time to look at the retreat video I linked where, not only are they turning themselves into human skeleton stick figures which is their own rocket-sled-to-hell right, but there’s malnourished kids there getting more liver damaging fructose in a day than a typical alcoholic gets ethanol in a week.

    Beyond that, as I factually identified, this guy is not only attacking others, but he is doing so by weaving a fraudulent web of lies that serves not only to harm the innocent parties he’s attacking, but harms bystanders whose only shortcoming is ignorance combined with gullibility.

    But Noooooo, I’m the bad guy because I call him on it, alert my 150,000 plus monthly readers to it, and take a stand.

    Is there anything you’d actually take a stand for, Serge? Or, are you as I suspect: the ethical equivalent of a perpetually limp dick?

  17. Rip on February 26, 2011 at 12:09

    VEGAN TROLL: Hey meat-eating caveman ape*, how’s that meat rotting in your stomach doing?

    ME: Fine. How’re those vegetables doing rotting in yours?

    • Dana on February 26, 2011 at 21:18

      Me: (1) The meat is not rotting in my stomach, it’s being broken down into amino acids by my stomach acid. By the time it gets into my intestines, it won’t be meat anymore.

      (2) No kidding, huh? If I eat a lot of plant matter, I can tell what I had at my last meal the next time I visit the little girl’s room. What’s the fucking point of eating it if it’s not even breaking down? Yeah yeah, I know… nutrition. Good thing I don’t rely on it by itself, then.

    • Jorge on March 22, 2011 at 12:36

      Me: whatever

  18. Ed on February 26, 2011 at 12:58

    Yes, he’s an Aussie. I’m ashamed my fellow countryman has stooped this low.

  19. Sean on February 26, 2011 at 13:09

    Durian(sheep)rider has really descended into the role of cliché evil scientist at this point.

    Give him a lab coat and he can rub his hands together and mug the camera saying, “They said I was mad, MAD to eat 70 bananas a day! I’ll show them!!! I’ll make a YouTube video!!!!!!!”

    ♫ Buhm buhm buhm♫

  20. Emily Deans MD on February 26, 2011 at 13:14

    You are wasting your time…. But in the most delightful way.

  21. rob on February 26, 2011 at 13:19

    He says he eats 70 bananas a day … I say I eat 70 hamsters a day … chances are we’re both lying.

    • Ravi on March 1, 2011 at 21:25

      no, d-boy could be telling the truth… didn’t you see that constipated look on his face?…
      great threat BTW – (haven’t had so many laughs since my last comedy club visit years ago–)

  22. Jennifer on February 26, 2011 at 13:31

    I thought part of the idea of eating vegan was it was sustainable for the planet. How can 70 bananas be sustainable agriculture? I mean, set aside the fact that it’s fucking NUTS, how can you expect a banana plant to produce that much?

    I just ran 70 bananas through Fitday: An average banana is 4 ounces, so 70 of them would be 7000 kcals and 206 grams of fiber. You’d be shitting like a lowland gorilla!

    • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 18:19

      Plus because of the floods in Oz the price of bananas has skyrocketed.

      • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 18:21

        But I forgot he’ll just use his dole money (welfare cheque) to pay for it.

    • Dana on February 26, 2011 at 21:19

      I’ve SEEN a banana tree. Up close and in person. We had a few of them in our backyard garden at one of the houses we lived in on Subic Bay in the Philippines. Late ’70s, early ’80s, when it was still a Navy base. Those trees are *small.* No way are they gonna hold 70 fruit each.

      • gallier2 on February 27, 2011 at 01:59

        Normal banana trees hold 3 to 20 tiers of 20 bananas, so between 60 and 400 bananas. I’ve seen banana plantations on Guadeloupe and also garden varieties in Gabon, the plants can be up to 4 meter high. I have even a neighbour here (near Luxemburg) who has a 3 m banana tree in his garden.

      • anand srivastava on February 28, 2011 at 04:20

        A banana variety is nicknamed in the local lingo which means 1000 fruits. Yes it can give a thousand bananas. But it gives only once per year.

    • William on February 27, 2011 at 12:45

      Lowland gorillas also eat vegans who promote their nonsense. Oh wait, Kong was a highlander. ;)

      • Ravi on March 1, 2011 at 21:27

        … last vegan i ate tasted off, not like chicken at all.

  23. HeMan on February 26, 2011 at 13:41

    Vegans are cowards. Afraid of death, and anything that reminds them of death. Most are extremely insecure, weak-minded, and react poorly to any criticism. I mean really, when someone makes a comment that eating so much meat/eggs is going to make me sick, I don’t hop on the internet and whine to my little pussy buddies and try to mount a cyber-attack on their forums. But you damn well know that’s exactly what happens with these folks. No confidence.

    Now, those who exploit them… I’m torn between congratulating them on their lack of ethics and preying on the weak, or smacking them upside the head.

    • Sean on February 26, 2011 at 14:24

      What’s wrong with being afraid of death? Once you hit 40, being afraid of death is a big motivator, it’s what helps a lot of people to reassess their lifestyle, especially if they have kids.

      • HeMan on February 26, 2011 at 14:31

        To be cheesy: Fear is the mind-killer.
        Fear should never be a motivation, it makes you do stupid, irrational things.

        We are born, we live, and we die. There is nothing frightening about it. And I don’t claim to know if anything happens afterwards, or whether we blink out into the dark chasm of nothingness.

        I try to do the best for my children because … they’re my children. No other reason.

        I think perhaps many people confuse being cognisant of death, say around age 40, with a fear of death. They are quite different.

      • Sean on February 26, 2011 at 15:00

        Yeah, I was confusing these things but now that you’ve pointed out the difference by quoting Dune I totally get that they are different.

      • Kurt G Harris MD on February 26, 2011 at 17:53

        Sean, I bow to your mastery of sarcasm. A true talent. I am a callow neophyte by comparison. : )

      • Sean on February 27, 2011 at 06:28

        Thanks Kurt.

        But in a more serious vein, I guess I consider being cognizant of death something like the twenty-year old who knows that death exists as they might know that the solar system has a planet called Neptune orbiting around somewhere, as opposed to a 45 year old who has a fear of death because seen had friends and family die, has dependents, and is probably genetically programmed to be more age/risk-averse for obvious reasons.

        Fear is a great motivator. No members of the animal kingdom lack it. It shouldn’t rule one’s life, of course, but to pretend it isn’t important is silly.

        Opportunist predators like wolves finely tune fear, aggression and curiosity, whereas a yappy dog will show their teeth to anyone. comforted by the fact that the postman won’t dare punt them into the next zip code (just go on a shooting spree instead).

        Some animals like wolverines are much less risk-averse than the average predator, it allows them to punch above their weight and carve out a niche for themselves that otherwise wouldn’t exist. But in general fear is an important balancing factor in our evolutionary emotional makeup.

        Of course we live in a society where almost all risk can be avoided so fear can really get out of control. We’ve all seen that, I’m sure.

      • Al Ciampa on February 27, 2011 at 17:51


        I agree with most of what you’ve laid out here, save for the comment of 20yo’s. I am certain that you would exclude from that category of the population those that have watched their brothers literally explode due to IED or other form of munitions. I can assure you, they were scared shitless of dying, and drove on anyway. It wasn’t the metaphorical Neptune falling out of the sky, either.

        Just keep the larger picture in mind, is what I am respectfully asking of you, Sean. Also, I enjoy your brand sarcasm.

        As to death, I’m convinced it is a “dirt nap”. Nothing I’ve seen or experienced leads me to any other conclusion than “from dust to dust”. Any thinking human being is (IMO) reaching (hoping) for immortality by referring to religion, spirituality or an afterlife.

        Did religion evolve in order to control people? Maybe just females? Richard has commented on this. Did it evolve to help ignorant, newly thinking people to cope with and understand the powers of nature? Sure. Did it evolve to let people feel better about death? Sure. Did it evolve to force people into submission by claiming it better in the next life? Sure. Did it evolve to essentially keep people ignorant? Sure. All of the above? Sure.

        It’s not healthy to be scared of the concept of death – because we can think in the abstract is the problem. It’s healthy to be scared of that which can acutely end you, like a fall from a cliff, or attacking tiger. But I think you were getting at this in your last paragraph.


      • Ruben on February 28, 2011 at 00:05


        To me there’s one fear that overrides all others, including fear of death, and that is my fear of not living well before I die. We all die, I have seen the truth of that all around me. But how many people do you know that live well before then?

      • Sean on March 1, 2011 at 04:01


        I agree, I was thinking mostly of myself and my peers as 20yos and other artificially coddled creatures like domestic dogs. Experiencing war first hand would certainly be a balancing factor, especially modern warfare which is probably way more intense than anything an HG would be exposed to. That doesn’t change the fact that we are genetically programed to much less risk-averse when young IMO.

        I’m not sure what you mean about the larger picture, I thought I was already talking about the larger picture. That is, in general predators have a healthy balance of fear, aggression, curiosity, etc. Animals living in artificial environments like dogs or humans tend to have less of this balance. So you get weightlifters talking about having no fear, or little dogs acting hyper-aggressive, or little guys with mustaches driving huge trucks.

        I’m not pushing paleo-reenactment and I’ve a lot of respect for these intense badass bodybuilders who espouse this sort of ‘no fear’ attitude. But let’s distinguish ‘no fear’ meaning push yourself to the limits you don’t even know you have and actual fear which is a natural and healthy thing.

      • Al Ciampa on March 1, 2011 at 12:14


        What I had meant be “big picture” you attended to in the first paragraph here.

        Of course young equals less risk-averse… how do you think they recruit new Marines?

        As I a thinking about it, I’m not sure there is a fear of death. I think the fear that is felt is actually an abstract fear of the pain or injury that it takes to reach death – probably reinforced by Hollywood’s sensationalism. When I think of death as a sleep that you never wake out of, I get warm, not tremble-y. And I’m 40yo. Is this only me?

        When I think of fear, I think of being mauled by a bear, or great white shark. I don’t even think your bodybuilder or truck driver would jump in the shark tank, even though they claim fearlessness. being out spoken about fearlessness is both a cover for actually being scared and a skewed notion of power due to firearms and society. People are funny.

        Again, I agree with a lot of what you say, and enjoy sense of humor. I thank you for your ever present amiable posture.


      • Dex on February 26, 2011 at 21:12


      • susan on February 26, 2011 at 20:30

        I am not fearful of death itself, as I believe there is something beyond this life. It’s the whole dying part that kinda unnerves me.

      • JLL on February 27, 2011 at 14:03

        Not being afraid of death is rational only when it is absolutely certain that there is nothing you can do to avoid it.

        If there is even a small chance of death not being certain, being afraid of dying is a pretty smart thing to do. And there happen to be quite a few people who think we will conquer aging in the relatively near future:

        – JLL

      • Ruben on February 28, 2011 at 00:09

        I find that people who want to live forever are usually the ones who have given eternal life little thought. Given enough time, everything you do will become mundane. Yes, even your greatest hobby. Even a thousand great hobbies. And that’s assuming that everyone has access to eternal life. Otherwise you’d see people you love dieing around you for eternity. Yay.

        But think of the children! That you are not allowed to have. Because, both they and you being immortal, there would be a population explosion like the earth has never seen, depleting all resources in a matter of decades (and quality of life long before that).

        No, for me, the worst punishment I could think of would be immortality.

      • babblefrog on March 2, 2011 at 10:38

        Just curious: how long do you think people should be allowed to live? How will you know when it is time for you to quit?

      • Ruben on March 2, 2011 at 23:44

        There’s at least one simple cutoff point: the point where their total health care costs are higher than what they can provide in economic value. I’m not going to work 80 hours to let someone else live forever.

        Below that it’s personal choice. For me 80 is more than enough, and younger is fine too if my quality of life diminishes too much.

      • Dana on February 26, 2011 at 21:23

        A certain amount of fear of death is to be expected but when you let it so take over your life that it becomes thanatophobia, then you lose sight of the fact that all life on earth is supported by death in some way or another, and you start making stupid choices. In fact I’m not sure which is worse–stupid choices fueled by a sense of immortality or stupid choices fueled by extreme fear of the inevitable.

        It’s like vegans want to live in this sterile little blister-pack world where everyone is perfectly safe from everyone else. I can’t quite believe it, I hope it was an urban legend but I’ve even heard of vegans who were amenable to putting wild carnivores on vegan diets because it was “better” for them. WTF.

    • Jorge on March 22, 2011 at 12:47

      I haven’t thought of that, hmmm, I always had a suspicion that a lot of vegans have personality disorders, the sort of manic depressive. But yeah, they really seem to be afraid to be killed by death… Besides being narcissistic. I don’t buy that they care about animals, most of them know squat about nature and on how herbivores will happily munch on meat if they have the chance. And some, like elephants for example, if they come to the taste of meat… better run away from them.

  24. Michael on February 27, 2011 at 05:59

    The final part of this video takes dishonesty and manipulation in the other direction by showing various pictures of various “vegan” athletes with various degrees of impressive body composition. The thing is, I simply don’t believe it. If they’re claiming they got that way on a pure raw vegan diet, they’re lying. In many photos, the lean mass pictured is simply impossible on a diet consisting primarily of fruit, as this particular sect of the Vegan Menace advocates. Whether they’re getting the high protein needed for that level of lean mass from various powders or sneaking meat and other animal products when no one is looking I don’t know, but they’re getting it somehow.

    No question. We had this discussion years ago on the Native Nutrition yahoo group and had several “insiders” (people who were closely involved with various raw food “leaders”) from various raw food movements (all vegan) report that the “gurus” were doing all kinds of cheating behind the scenes.

    Not to mention Chet Day blew the lid on many of the “vegan/vegetarian” gurus a few years back

    Natural Health Gurus Ate Animal Foods

    I particularly like this story:

    Regarding Paul Bragg, we always saw him at a restaurant in the Ilikai Hotel in Waikiki. His favorite meal was a char-broiled hamburger according to the waitresses that served him. At that time, he professed to be a vegetarian. He was a nice man and ran a free exercise class on the beach.

    He reminded me of my father-in-law who wrote a book called, “If Man Made It, Don’t Eat It,” and Haal[sic] always told people he was a vegetarian, but we knew he enjoyed a good steak 2-3 times a week.

    • Sean on February 27, 2011 at 07:11

      This reminds me of Robin Hanson’s ideas about strictness and hypocrisy.

      “humans developed huge brains to manage the process of subtly evading social norms while pretending to fully support them. Since those who think themselves better at this process should favor stricter rules, people should prefer to seem to favor strict rules in order to show confidence in their abilities. In this way the urge toward excessively strict rules may gain quite widespread support.”

      I personally don’t think brain size was driven by hypocrisy but it is interesting how these purveyers of strictness are often the ones most willing to break their own rules. I’d suspect there is an evolutionary advantage to hypocrisy as there might be to left-handedness.

  25. Steve Macey on February 26, 2011 at 15:28

    I’m so fucking embarrassed this guy is an Australian. This reminds me of the straw man arguments creationists (young earth creaotards) like to throw up.

    • Kurt G Harris MD on February 26, 2011 at 18:02

      That’s funny.

      It seem to me Aussies and Brits are kind of over-represented among foreigners adopting American originated pseudoscience. I loaded an instant view movie about Darwin that looked interesting and had good production values. I watched for a good 15 minutes before realizing it was produced by some outfit promoting young earth creationism …. from Australia.

    • pieter d on February 27, 2011 at 09:12

      from Paul Shepard, ‘Coming Home to the Pleistocene’, page 101

      Vegeterianism, like creationism, simply reinvents human biology to suit an ideology.

  26. Richard Nikoley on February 26, 2011 at 16:09

    Hey, I might maybe could get into this banana thing. Just ate half of one and find myself wishing that my wife hand’t taken the first half as part of her breakfast this morning.

    Half a banana today, 30 tomorrow! :)

    • Dana on February 26, 2011 at 21:24

      There needs to be a Facebook-style Like function in your comments section. I was actually looking for it for this comment. :D

  27. Ann Marie @ CHEESESLAVE on February 26, 2011 at 16:25

    How obnoxiously stupid.

    Love the quote by Bourdain. That might very well be my favorite quote by anyone ever.

    Right up there with Julia Child’s quote, “If you’re afraid of using too much butter, you can use cream instead.”

    I lived with some vegans before at a vegetarian co-op in college. None of them looked like the vegan athletes this guy cherry-picked. They all looked like those stick people in your photo. Skinny, wasting away, pale and pasty.

    Plus, who says thin means you are healthy?! There are tons of supermodels who are rail thin living on Diet Cokes and cigarettes — not healthy by any stretch of the imagination.

    Let’s look at their B12 levels and bone density. Let’s test their brain function and memory. Then we’ll talk about who is healthier.

    Read this article about a 12-year-old vegan girl with the spine of an 80-year-old:

    • Richard Nikoley on February 26, 2011 at 16:40

      I can always count on you to take a firm, moral stand, Ann Marie. This is not a “difference of opinion,” as your link attests to.

      Here’s another: vegan baby deaths.

      • Liz Downunder on March 2, 2011 at 02:20

        Interesting that some of these babies didn’t even get breast milk. I guess it’s not vegan…

    • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 18:30

      parents need to be held accountable.

    • Dana on February 26, 2011 at 21:27

      And yet they’ll take a baby away AT BIRTH in the UK from a twentysomething woman who had a history of hospitalization for mental health issues *as a teenager.* Because she *might* hurt her baby even though she hasn’t had a chance yet. But they’ll let someone like this poor girl go twelve years neglected and starved. WTF.

      That whole family needs intervention.

      • Ruben on February 28, 2011 at 00:14

        I hope intervention is the new name for sterilisation?

    • Lierre on February 28, 2011 at 10:09

      That poor child. I destroyed my spine in similar fashion as a teenage vegan. When I first went vegan, my mom used to cry herself to sleep at night over it. She was right, as it turned out. It was a very bad idea.

      • Ann Marie @ CHEESESLAVE on February 28, 2011 at 11:20

        I think I would also cry myself to sleep, Lierre.

        Thank goodness I will have your book, The Vegetarian Myth — which will be required reading in our household.

  28. keithallenlaw on February 26, 2011 at 17:17

    OMG. That link of ‘the monkey enviers’ with the Vegan Stick Figure People
    was so sad. Sad because they adopted such brain washing concept.
    Who am I to speak? I lived this crazy life style. I was a strict fruitarian
    for one year, and at first I thought I was feeling good, but toward the
    end I became emaciated and very weak. People accused me of having
    aids and cancer. Fuck that. Glad I found this place. Now I’m 190lbs.
    @5’11” with less body fat than when I was a fruitarian.
    Hail to animal fat!

    • Richard Nikoley on February 26, 2011 at 17:27

      Keith, you felt pretty good initially because you were on a high fat diet (your own rump lard). When your body no longer had fat to spare, you began to feel like crap.

      That’s why these people insist on eating such massive quantities of fruit, so you’re hyped up on sugar all day long so you don’t notice that you’re wasting away.

      • keithallenlaw on February 27, 2011 at 15:19

        That makes so much sense to me now that you shared this info.

  29. Austin on February 26, 2011 at 17:57

    Awesome post Richard. I love it.

  30. Sean Croxton on February 26, 2011 at 18:07

    Fantastic post! I like the pic, too. Hehe. :)

    • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 18:27

      Yes, great pic Sean. Loved your talk with Adams – the best one out of all.

    • Richard Nikoley on February 26, 2011 at 22:20

      Hey Sean.

      Just so you know, good thing I was careful with the spell checker. It wanted you to be Sean Crouton.

  31. Adam Panetta on February 26, 2011 at 18:37

    Food doesn’t stack on muscle otherwise everyone would be big! High intensity resistance training over a long period of time does, with sufficient rest and recovery etc of course. I haven’t had issues improving my physique on a predominantly fruit and veg diet.

    • Sarkoz on February 26, 2011 at 18:45

      Amazing what the human body can do, even when it’s malnourished. Of course it starves the internal organs and brain to accomplish it.

    • Dana on February 26, 2011 at 21:28

      Where the hell do you think all those extra amino acids come from, the Protein Fairy?

  32. David on February 26, 2011 at 19:31

    I see all these pictures of guys, but what type of figure does a healthy Paleo woman have? I live in a cross-country-skiing area and the women here, to me, look unhealthy. They eat primarily grains, vegetables and fruits and do huge amounts of cardio via skiing. Not overweight, but they look gaunt and bony. And stressed. But that brought up the thought to me: what should they look like if they were following a Paleo diet and lifestyle? Surely not muscular.

    • Jeanmarie on February 26, 2011 at 20:49

      @David: “Surely not muscular”? Surely you jest. Of course women following the paleo lifestyle will be muscular, appropriate to a woman’s form. Have you seen photos of Mark Sisson’s wife or the many Crossfit adherents? Muscles aren’t just for men. Women, with drastically lower levels of testosterone, among other differences, simply will not put on muscle to the extent that a man will. That doesn’t mean a meat-eating woman who weight trains won’t be muscular, and it also doesn’t mean she won’t be feminine and beautiful.

      • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 21:01

        At a certain point woman can start to look too masculine particularly body builders.

      • Sue on February 26, 2011 at 21:07

        All the cross fitter ladies look feminine and are strong.

      • Dana on February 26, 2011 at 21:32

        Yes, if they’re using steroids. Of course, a lot of how they look to you is filtered through your own cultural lens. I was raised by my stepmom who did bodybuilding for several years (eventually she had lupus and couldn’t deal anymore). No ‘roids, no freakiness, she was just well-built. Even for years after she quit being active at the gym, she kept a good physique. This from someone who was chubby as a kid.

        Only problem is she’s got her dad’s face, and her dad has very masculine features. On top of that she had the typical boob changes that a lot of women get after pregnancy, so she looks kind of flat without a wonderbra or similar holding up the girls. So one day some years back, she almost got her ass kicked in a redneck bar for being a “she-male.” But her face was the problem, not her build, and you can’t change your face with weight-training.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 09:02

        I guarantee you Laura DeMarco is no raw vegan. 370# deadlift:

      • keithallenlaw on February 27, 2011 at 15:10

        Very impressive. I would have liked to seen her shoulder blades locked.
        She looked a little rounded in her upper back but non the less an
        impressive lift.

      • Brad on February 27, 2011 at 20:45

        I actually worked with Laura when I still lived in Atlanta. I know at the time she was very strict on the Zone diet. She owns and operates her own badass Crossfit affiliate now:

        She’s actually the one who first started my Paleo knowledge cascade by pointing me to Sisson’s blog.

      • blueballs on March 1, 2011 at 08:14

        Mark Sisson’s wife is a vegetarian.

      • Monica on March 2, 2011 at 16:02

        No, she’s a pescatarian. Big difference.

    • Dana on February 26, 2011 at 21:29

      David, look up “Strong is the new skinny” on Facebook. You will be amazed. :D

    • Merrill on June 6, 2015 at 12:36

      Muscles on a woman come in differently. They allow the pleasing curves that point to them as being healthy and able to have children. A realistically muscular female will usually fit into societal norms of attractiveness. But just like with all healthy humans one has to keep up the work. Activity determines physique, Diet determines health. Or something like that.

  33. Dex on February 26, 2011 at 21:14

    Richard, an excellent post and best use of a Bourdain quote by far. Keep up the good work!

  34. William on February 26, 2011 at 23:27

    Yuck! The pics of the Vegan Stick Figure People look just like the sissy, commie hippie freaks at the local “health food” store. Could we just move along from the Woodstock era, once and for all?

  35. Robbo on February 26, 2011 at 23:48

    I loved the Bourdain quote. Another guy who tells it like it is.
    At the root, man is part of nature, product of a billion years or so of natural struggle. The nature in us – including our natural diet – is to be respected, not feared, or worse, hated.

  36. Jan on February 27, 2011 at 17:12

    Re: The Brain as a Hunting Weapon – this might be of interest:

    “Three Men vs. Fifteen Hungry Lions” Oo

  37. Athonwy on February 27, 2011 at 02:46

    I love how butthurt you get over this guy. You look pretty desperate to discredit him, which really just discredits you. Your paleo diet is based on no better science than atkins, south beach, blood type, or any of those other BS fad diets that people have come up with to sell books. What about the recent discovery that people were eating bread about about 75,000 years earlier than previously thought? Doesn’t that discredit what you paleo advocates have been pushing for years? Doesn’t that also make you question how many other things you think about paleolithic people’s diets are wrong? Are ANY of you actually anthropologists? Do you have any peer-reviewed science to back up your beliefs? I know a LOT of vegans, and they come in EVERY body type, from thin to fat, weak to massively muscular and ripped, the whole shebang. To try to say that all vegans are skinny and unhealthy is just foolish. Now, if you were to say that cultish raw-foodists who attend brainwashing gatherings all the time are usually unhealthy you might be onto something there. The research is out there on vegan diets, and people do just fine on them, usually better than omnivores. The research on raw food diets…not so much. It’s such a new fad, and there are no even semi-long term studies, just anecdotal evidence which is worth nothing. Less than nothing, really, because it can cause harm.

    If you are going to attack this guy at least have the temerity to attack him for what he is, a brainwashed raw food nutjob, not a run-of-the-mill vegan. Better yet, stick to promoting what YOU do with positivity, and don’t be a hater.

    • Melissa McEwen on February 27, 2011 at 05:22

      Veganism works for some people. Responsible vegans know it’s about animals, not because it’s a perfect diet, and supplement and follow actual science. Eating mainly fruit is not supported by any science.

      Please look up the article on paleolithic “bread.” It’s not actually bread at all. I am in an anthropology program and work closely with anthropologists.

    • Dave Fish on February 27, 2011 at 11:14

      See this is the perfect example of the typical shallow and flawed thinking in the vegan community. Eating bread 75,000 years earlier than previously thought? If you are referring to the recent finding of starches on tools that is a far cry from eating bread.

      There is plenty of peer-reviewed science to back up our “beliefs”, the same can not be said for vegan beliefs which seem to be based on revising history to suit the ideology and not on evolution.

    • VW on February 27, 2011 at 12:30

      You misused “temerity.”

      • Athonwy on February 27, 2011 at 21:18

        Actually, I misused the auto-correct feature on my brand new phone, still getting used to it.

    • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 14:01

      Alright, time to take on Anthony’s psychodouche….

      Oh…never mind. I mean, clearly he’s new here, likely won’t stick around, is content to make assumptions about our “ignorance” while exposing his own…because all that stuff including 30,000 year old bread (or is it 75,000 year old “bread,” now, I can’t keep up), anthropological references up the ying-yang, et al, are all here among the 2,800+ posts of archives.

      I think I’ll leave him on his own and to the crumbs a few commenters have already tossed him.

      • Athonwy on February 27, 2011 at 21:17

        My name is Athonwy, not Anthony, it’s Welsh, and your response sounds rather cowardly.

      • Al Ciampa on February 27, 2011 at 21:40


        How exactly can you be a coward on the I-net? For that matter, how can you be courageous? Sitting in the comfort of wherever you call home and stabbing out into the dead zone doesn’t take much courage or cowardliness.

        -Al (not Welsh)

    • Liz Downunder on March 2, 2011 at 02:38

      I know a few vegans too, and like them, their diets come in all shapes and sizes. One family (mum, dad and 2 children) are morbidly obese because they eat way too many carbs, in the form of baked goods and bread and chips and the like. That is also child abuse, IMO.

      Vegan definitely does not equal healthy although I don’t doubt there are people it works for. Raw veganism with no grains or processed foods is a totally different ballgame from ‘no animal products’.

      And good luck to the Durian wotzisname, it’s his body. I like bananas, they’re a ‘high-carb’ treat in my low-carb household – just smother them with HEAVY cream and a few pecans and blueberries. Yum!!

  38. 02/28/11 – Monday Squats on February 27, 2011 at 19:02

    […] Vegan Lies – Free The Animal […]

  39. TJ on February 27, 2011 at 04:16

    How to make a shitload of money:

    1. Eat a bunch of meat.
    2. Lift heavy.
    3. Pretend you’re a vegan and sell e-books on how to get ripped eating 40g of protein a day.

  40. Jan on February 27, 2011 at 06:04

    Yesterday, my husband and I got up around 7 am (sleeping if on a Saturday), he made us breakfast (bacon and eggs). We ran some errands, came home, cleaned the house, made a project of cleaning out the cabinets in our bathroom. Our 16-year-old left around noon to go spend the rest of the weekend at a friend’s house, so I made a huge batch of oxtail stew and rendered about 10 pounds of pastured lard I had hanging around in the freezer (and documented both processes with my camera). Because we were childless, we lit a fire in the fireplace, opened a bottle of wine, ate the oxtail stew (which was DELICIOUS) and spent a good deal of the evening either entertaining or traumatizing the dog on the floor in an, er, amorous encounter.

    Today, we were up again at 7 a.m. – since it’s going to be in the 40s here today, my husband dragged the smoker out of the garage and is smoking a brisket. I am going to spend the day making beef bone broth and chicken stock, after making our traditional Sunday brunch. He plans to do some work today (he develops software) while he yells at the Food Network (one of his favorite weekend pastimes) and I am going to finish the March theme for my blog and write up some recipes that I will post this week.

    I guess the point to all of this is that if I was eating 70 bananas – or even 30 – I would get NONE of this done: I’d spend the entire day on the toilet.

    • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 07:20

      Inspiring, Jan. Thank you very much for taking the time to write it up. What, a little Yin to balance out the Yang, or somethng lie that?

      • Jan on February 27, 2011 at 08:29

        Something like that. :) Real, nourishing food isn’t just something you can peel and eat, nor is it something you have to eat in ridiculous amounts. It takes time and effort, and keeps you healthy and active – even when you’re a middle-class couple staring 50 in the face.

  41. Gabriele on February 27, 2011 at 06:59

    I had a run in with this Durian rider joker when he was attacking a vegan friend of mine. He made it clear immediately that he was incredibly ignorant and rude. A real simpleton. It is well-known in the vegan world and especially in the raw vegan world that there is rampant competition to see who is more “pure”, there is condescension, rudeness, and backstabbing. They are unhappy. They are always hungry. They know “something” is missing. To live that lifestyle requires militancy and zeal or you can’t do it. Oh, i forgot, they are also very judgmental of each other. It’s not a happy bunch.

    • Sam on February 27, 2011 at 08:45

      Gabriele is absolutely on the money. This is not a happy bunch at all. I spent a few weeks on a “retreat” with raw vegans including many of the famous gurus. I was there to train as a raw vegan chef. I met Doug Graham, the 80-10-10 guy. He is the supposedly fabulous athletic guru of these 30 bananas people. He sure made a lasting impression on me. That crazy little dude screamed at me for taking a bunch of grapes and putting them on my plate. He pounced on me at the buffet style dinner tables and told me to put the fruit back. “The fruit is for the fruitarians!” That is what he said. Actually, he screamed it like an old crow. I kid you not.

      Graham protestelizes constantly to people, telling them they should just eat fruit and then bitches at people who are eating the fruit? I told him I was one of the students in charge of the food that evening (because I was) and that I was sure that the fruit was for everyone. We all paid the same fee to be there and that does include equal rights to the food. He said it was unfair that the fruitarians might run out of fruit because all these “other” people were taking it. WTF?

      I politely told him we had plenty of fruit and were not going to run out. I also assured him that even if we did, we’d go out and get more. He would not back down in the face of logic. I would not give up my grapes. He stomped off in a huff and gave me the stink eye for the rest of week. Geez. Okay so I admit I deliberately “provoked” him by sitting at a table nearby and eating a massive amount of grapes where he could see me. C’mon now! Is this kind of attitude and control freakishness healthy? It isn’t rational. That’s for sure.

      Doug Graham does not appear healthy by my definition. He is a pasty angry stringy self righteous little man with deep dark circles under his sunken eyes. The rest of the raw celebs and their followers were also a miserable unpleasant bunch that took themselves and their theories way too seriously. Some were pleasant but seemed spaced out and not quite there. They were probably still in the newbie euphoric stage. David Wolfe seemed nice and a bit more grounded than his peers. Although I wouldn’t follow his proclaimed dietary practices, he did give me an excellent bit of advice that was inadvertently responsible for my decision not to become a raw vegan chef or any kind of a raw vegan at all. He told me never to take advice from someone who isn’t getting the results that I want.

      Did I want to become an uptight, judgmental, pasty, pale, angry, high strung, obsessive, ascetic? No. Goodbye raw vegan camp. I still do make one hell of a raw veg lasagna. Too bad you need a half a bottle of enzymes just to digest that *ucker. Oof!

      Health is more than just the condition of your body. Good health is also reflected by the state of your mind.

      • Sue on February 27, 2011 at 15:43

        Thanks for that. I think Graham looks terrible.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 16:52

        yes, he does, especially the more recet videos, now that his body is eating itself.

      • Sue on February 28, 2011 at 14:21


    • William on February 27, 2011 at 17:42

      I took some time look at Graham’s site, just to see what he is all about. After seeing those crazy Charlie Manson like eyes, and nonsense such as “sensory fasting,” I had enough. He’s just another common as the come, utopian nut case with no common sense or understanding of human nature… or human biology.

  42. Mike OD on February 27, 2011 at 10:52

    I don’t even have the mental energy anymore to entertain conversation with people of any eating lifestyle that is more concerned about being “right” than accepting that health can come from many other ways.

    “What some call health, if purchased by perpetual anxiety about diet, isn’t much better than tedious disease.” ~ George Dennison Prentice, 1860

    “As a people, we have become obsessed with Health. There is something fundamentally, radically unhealthy about all this. We do not seem to be seeking more exuberance in living as much as staving off failure, putting off dying. We have lost all confidence in the human body.” ~Lewis Thomas

    “Be careful about reading health books. You may die of a misprint.” ~ Mark Twain

    People need to eat real foods, enjoy a beer once and a while and go live life. Everyone dies in the end anyways, so there is no such thing as a “perfect” diet.

  43. Cristina on February 27, 2011 at 10:56

    Excellent article! I was a vegetarian for just a little over a year after I had read about factory farming (which is NOT farming), but came to my senses after reading the WAPF website. I can see how a vegetarian using eggs and dairy products can possibly lead a some-what healthy life, as long as they avoid soy products, but strict vegetarians (aka, vegans) are just quickening their own demise and reducing the world population, which could be a good thing! Remember: survival of the fittest!

  44. Brian Scott on February 27, 2011 at 12:39

    Oh gods, I want to get skinny, but not [i]that[/i] skinny.

    Re: some people’s comments on ethical vegetarianism, I was disabused of that notion from learning of the considerable harm farming can do to animals that originally lived on converted farmland. I don’t think you can call a particular brand of vegetarianism ethical if it relies on consuming industrially produced food.

  45. Alex on February 27, 2011 at 12:51

    I’d love to see an Aussie deathmatch between Anthony Colpo and DurianRider. Colpo, who is an unapologetic meat-eater and seriously ripped, would snap twig-boy in half in an instant.

    • blueballs on March 1, 2011 at 08:34

      These days Colpo is an unapologetic carb eater & still ripped to shreds.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 1, 2011 at 08:44

        In case you’re new here, blueballs, I have long advocated whatever level of natural carbs work for you individually. Both the young, as well as those who never blew out their metabolisms seem to get along fine on moderate to even high carbs, from starch (not sugar). And hell, if eating more starch helps you stay clean, that’s far preferable to being miserable. For me, I seem to do best with lots of protein and fat, modest carbs. I prefer to cycle as well so I’m not doing the same macro ratios all the time.

        Whatever works, man. Not the Church of Paleo and never will be if I have anything to say about it.

      • blueballs on March 1, 2011 at 09:38

        Long time listener, first time caller. I’m quite aware of where you stand. I was merely pointing out to the commenter Colpo’s updated stance.

  46. Andrea on February 27, 2011 at 13:15

    Thanks for this post Richard! I read Sean’s blogpost and watched the video. It was unbearable. This dude is insane. No wonder he has no job – this guy needs a psychotherapist. Seriously.
    I have no problem with vegans per se. Mike Mahler is a nice guy and I repect him. But this DurianRider is just insane.

    • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 13:22

      The only job appropriate to someone who sits around eating bananas all day — literally — is in a zoo, as an exhibit.

  47. Len on February 28, 2011 at 04:23

    Just checked out the 30bad site for the first time in months. One of them got out alive and a few (could be way more – I only read a couple of comments and then started to feel a bit dead) of the cult members are a bit stressed over it.

    I especially like the warning: “(don’t read this if this kind of thing might trigger you to stray from lfrv)”

    Refers to this post:

    • D on February 28, 2011 at 16:46

      That is a really interesting article, thanks! This bit was good:

      Weren’t some people on 30 Bananas a Day promising to debunk Denise Minger’s critique of The China Study? Whatever happened with that?

      I honestly don’t know. I think they just gave up after a while because they realized they couldn’t touch it. Seriously, if I was Denise, I’d set up the front page of that blog to play Mc. Hammer’s “Can’t Touch This” on endless loop.

  48. Antonio on February 27, 2011 at 14:38

    I was vegan/vegetarian for 15 years, I still have a few friends that have been vega*n for longer (since I stopped about 10 yrs ago and they still eat/live this way). I say ‘few’ because of my former ‘friends’ flat out started hating, judging and talking shit about me once they found out I ate meat – typically its the ‘ethical’ or ‘spiritual’ veg*ns that do this. I know many militant veg*ns that are angry/negative either way and talk shit about everyone anyway.

    But I can tell you that my friends (or former friends) and many veg*ns I know or have met (which is many) do not touch any animal foods at all (other than diary) – they don’t cheat.

    One point I think needs to be understood is that many, if not MOST of them trained/ lifted or built muscle BEFORE they switched to a veg*n diet. They often use an appeal to authority as ‘proof’ (look at Tony GOnzalex, Mac Danzig, etc) which is meaningless, but these people were muscular or athletic before they went veg*n.

    It ‘s a religious ideology and ignorance of nature/biology – they have fear of death & elevate animal welfare over human welfare (animal worship) BUT they are unaware of or in denial about this.

    Richard hit the nail on the head, it’s most often an ‘anti-humanity’ sentiment that is the core issue & drives their unbelievably obnoxious behavior. Thanks for writing this.

  49. lea on February 27, 2011 at 14:42

    lol i am kind of nervous to comment…i have been a vegetarian for years…i never liked chicken, or the taste of fat, or those little pieces of gristle and bone in meat, they make me wanna spew…i gave a speech in december about why people need to go veg for my college speech class…

    um. yeah. i was sent the link to your blog by a good friend who has been doing paleo. she also made me watch an hour long doc on googlevideo, by that guy who did the Time article, i think. she knew i was veg, i had to drag the info out of her like pulling teeth lol!

    i am on day 4 of a cross b/t atkins and paleo. basically atkins that includes minor fruit and portion control nuts. I havent had such steady energy in such a long time…i am def in ketosis….

    i went this way b/c the low fat veg thing WAS NOT doing anything but letting me get fatter and fatter…i know the science is good b/c they DO teach you this in college, in a round about way if youre paying attention when they teach you about insulin and glucose…

    i love your attitude, your frank nature is very much like how i am. lol but its hard to read your pieces like this one! and i am having issues w my conscience…i am enough of a naturalist to understand and dig this way of life, but i also know what cafo’s are like…the cafo thing was pretty much the main reason why i stayed veg…that and a (misguided) belief that i had to stay completely veg to stay thin…

    anywho, just wanted to tell you that there are MANY vegan protein powders, and i HAVE built muscle, thru pilates and yoga, while using them. I used pea protein isolate. i had to, as a veg there was no other way for me to…workout 5 times a week (hard workouts, hot yoga and evil pilates) without getting protein from somewhere…

    i bought all that meat and felt so dirty. but something clicked. my name is lea and i will be around.

    • lea on February 27, 2011 at 14:49

      i have never had a problem w the food chain…just the suffering…and i am now a bacon fiend…(bacon is like secret crack to vegetarians and vegans)

      when i said above that i know the science is right from college, i meant the science behind low carb…in psych we go over insulin and glucose 4 to 6 times in diff classes BESIDES biology, b/c we have to study all forms of motivation, including hunger and thirst. plus we have to study what diabetes will do to ppl..

    • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 15:03

      You stick around, lea, and even if you find this is not totally for you, I’m certain you’ll come out better off than before.

      You’re honest. That’s all that counts for me. We’re here to help. Just shout.

  50. Dario on February 27, 2011 at 16:18

    WoW!! Didn’t watch the first vid, but the second of Durianrider he looks like an anorexic. Definitely starving to death. Who the hell wants to eat that much fruit. Gluttony is wrong. Eat less of more dense food.

    He is obviously mistaken about the Paleo’s being heavy, but I may have to agree with him on some of these other low carb diet “gurus”. Sorry, but Jimmy Moore is a big ole fat ass. He is forever on some crash low carb bullshit and he stays a fat fuck. So is his friend Dana Carpender. The Zone guy looks like shit. Atkins was a fat ass… it goes on…

    • Jason Sandeman on February 27, 2011 at 17:07

      Well, yo just can’t argue with the weight loss. The guy might be chubby to you, but he at least lost the weight.
      Dana carpenter also is battling Diabetes, which is another ball game entirely. A ruined metabolism, fighting insulin resistance, while trying to lose weight is not a fun game. Trust me, I know for a fact.

      • Dario on February 27, 2011 at 17:20

        He has lost weight, but he is still fat. I cannot post photo’s here, but the most recent I saw he looks 60 or 70 lbs overweight and so is his wife who he claims is low carb as well.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 17:50

        He has explicitly lamented in comments, emails and whatnot that his wife is not compliant, to an extent that surprises me. Tough spot.

    • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 17:03

      dario, just so you know, Jimmy is a friend of mine and that was true even before I went on his podcast. Jimmy is a tender, lovable and giving soul. He is getting more an more paleo and has lost a bunch of weight recently, in case you didn’t know.

      I can’t see any way to account for Jmmy other than as a tremendous value. He has always been meticulously honest about his own problems, comng down from a 400 pounder and likely severely damaged metabolism for life.

      On second thought, Jimmy is one of my heroes. Honesty trumps an awful lot with me.

      • Dario on February 27, 2011 at 17:17

        Sorry to insult him if he is your friend but, I don’t know him and or his character or personality other then what I read and all I get is a lot of bible thumping.

        He has lost a lot of weight, and so have a lot of other people. Obviously something is not working with it with how much he yo-yo’s. Broken metabolism? I don’t know. Should he be giving advice??

        His podcasts have put out a lot of information, but I still see him personally as small minded and I don’t take the advice if I don’t admire the source.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 17:31

        Dario, see this is the problem when you don’t follow along with everything. I’m guessing that you didn’t see his post a couple of months ago about christianity and paleo. Well, among the six or so inputs he received from others that he published verbatim, only one was from a thumper.

        The rest were from atheists, including myself. And he published that to his thumping audience.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 17:32

        He’s a meticulously honest man and given what he’s doing, it counts for a shitload with me.

      • Dario on February 27, 2011 at 17:42

        Ok, I will take it on your word he is a nice guy and very honest. Once again, sorry to insult a nice guy. But I still think he does not physically look very nice. If I were, and I am, the casual reader to his blog, heard his advice, heard he lost all this weight on low carb, believed in what he was saying…. and then got a load of what he looked like, I would shit my pants. He does not look good. I guess I should give him kudos for losing 200 el beez, but.. he still does not look good. If the lifestyle is supposed to work, you should look great after 6(?) years of following this stuff.

        Anyway, I hear he is starting some IF now. Actually, this is the only thing that has ever worked for me, even better than low carb and zero carb.

        So, I hope for this man that he can stick to this, it works, and he looks fab, and we can all take his advice from now on. I am not being a smart ass. I really hope him all the best because people really do judge a book by its cover and you need to have a really damn good cover to sell the book.

        My apologies to you Jimmy.

      • Rod on February 27, 2011 at 17:51

        With all due respect I would caution all the twenty somethings to be cautious in your judgement of the old guys.Life happens while you are chasing the dream or illusion.Some people get fat,some crazy,some angry,some wise, everybody a combo of what gets thrown at them.I tell my kids there is two ways to learn from me.Watch what I do well and watch the fraffic wrecks.My 25 year old gets it now.the nine yr old is establishing behaviours.and the 4.5 month guy is just pure anatomy

      • Richard Nikoley on February 27, 2011 at 17:54

        Yep, Dario, thanks for pointing out that he has discovered that fasting is not the torture he thought it was.

        I agree that he does not look…optimal. He looks decent for a previously 400 pounder with a wrecked metabolism who has devoted his life to spreading the word. Don’t make the mistake of assuming that students can’t far surpass their masters.

      • JP on February 28, 2011 at 09:25

        Thing is, paleo does work. Lower carb does work. In theory, these approaches are the best to lose weigth.

        However, people still have problem with how they approach foods, how they react to foods and the whole emotional aspect of eating. Paleo, vegan or not.

        Jimmy has obviously problems with foods in this regard and to blame him for trying to better his life is just plain stupid. I see a lot of courage in him : The guy is still trying even if most odds seem to be against him. On top of that, we know his struggles (he is honest) whereas we don’t know the struggles of other self appointed – or not- gurus.

        And, its not as if Jimmy is pretending to be in the best shape ever or to know it all.

      • Jeanmarie on March 11, 2011 at 19:50

        Small-minded? Jimmy Moore? No way. I’ve listened to an awful lot of his podcasts and he is not the one giving advice, he is always learning and asking questions. And considering his Baptist background, the fact that he is being open-minded about paleo and evolutionary biology etc says a lot about him. His initial weight loss was quite an accomplishment, and no, he’s not necessarily svelte, and may well have damaged his metabolism to the point it can’t be totally repaired, but that doesn’t make him any less inspirational. He keeps learning and growing and blogging and podcasting, and more power to him.

  51. tracker on February 27, 2011 at 16:48

    ///”The second part involves criticizing these folks (primarily Sisson) for their lack of “dietary purity,” i.e., for incorporating things like coffee, wine, dark chocolate, protein powder, canned sardines, fish oil caps, etc.”///

    Veganism to these people is a religion. To allow anything that doesn’t fit with the prescribed dogma is blasphemy.

    I used to work with a couple of vegans. Really nice people, never tried to push their diet on the rest of us, but they were skin and bones. I mean, seriously thin. You know, if that’s what floats your boat fine. The thing that gets me is when people try to push their views on me, and it especially pisses me off when they lie to do it.

  52. tina on February 27, 2011 at 19:04

    Meat and fat is where it’s at. My young kids will be smarter and do better in life because they eat lots of grass-fed meat and beef tallow and lard and lamb tallow etc.

  53. stuart on February 27, 2011 at 20:11

    not worth watching the video..silly non-sense is a forgone conclusion

    it must be that all vegetable heads are intoxicated with their correctness and will die for their beliefs.
    some come to their senses later after damage is done as I have read on

    even Dr Su of ‘Carbohydrates can Kill’ respects the vegetarians and tells them to try to adapt their diet to optimize it… it can be a fools errant tho with many traps.

    but here is the exception to the rule but we do not know what kind of vegetarian the great strongman Joe Rollio was who died at 104.

    Richard it is not necessary to showoff your testosterone in your response… wasted energy better to build your muscle mass.. … calm cool logic will freeze the dregs out.
    humor will let the vegetable trash slip on their banana peels and we can all laugh.


  54. Daniel on February 27, 2011 at 21:56

    Hmm, well it would seem that for Durianrider, a metabolically costly big gut has became more and more necessary at the expense of a big brain. Proof that evolution can actually go in reverse?

    Kitchen Confidential is an awesome book btw, as is No Reservations on the travel channel. Bourdain has such a charming wit both in his speaking and writing.

  55. Tom Woodward on February 28, 2011 at 14:17

    Hmm, slight difference between the emaciated folks in the 30 day banana retreat and the peeps in this Mov Nat retreat….

    Gee, I wonder why.

  56. Al on February 28, 2011 at 00:21

    I can’t prove it, because I wasn’t there with you in Subic. But please take my word for it: if it was in a backyard in Subic (= north Philippines) back when the American base was still there (almost 2 decades ago, now), and if Filipinos call it a “banana”, it is most likely to be, that which you and I call a “plantain”.

    What you call a “banana” is the Cavendish cultivar. There’s massive numbers being grown in South Philippines – and 99.9999% of those get exported, because Filipinos don’t like them.

    In South Philippines, Cavendish bananas ARE seen in the more upscale supermarkets, due to purchases by the expat-retiree crowd. At typically a buck or so per kilo. Because of zero transportation cost and lack of local consumers.

  57. durianrider on February 28, 2011 at 02:13

    #The paleo/primal diet crew that say carbs make you fat, how come 99% of em have fat guts?

    #Those guys in the photos, they arent even raw/vegan. We put on a retreat in 09 and lots of different people attend em.

    #How come there are natural vegan bodybuilders winning comps and power championships? I thought you died after skipping 2 meals as a vegan?

    #Is vegan dogma or human physiology?

    #My next vid will be even more truth. Be warned. ;)

    #Thanks for the mention Sean.

    • Jason Sandeman on February 28, 2011 at 03:45

      Truth? DurianRider – Again, the Dogma of Veganism…
      The basis – at the core: The central ethical question is whether it is right for humans to use and kill nonhumans.
      So, basically, let’s play a little here.
      Plants are non-human, so are bugs.
      Animals obviously.
      Take your bananas for instance…
      Numerous pesticeds used to combat fungus/insects. What right does a VEGAN have to eat a banana given their dogma? Is it not killing a nonhuman? What makes killing an insect “better” than killing an animal?
      You post a video on how a cow gets a bolt in the brain, and comment on the lack of humanity. Well, at least the guy has the balls to look the creature in the eye when they do it. Where is your video of the poor, innocent little bugs as they die a slow, fucking painful death, with thier little legs thrashing in the chemicals they have been bathed in.
      Where is that truth man? Of course, that is a inconvenience for you, right? Better not to think on that.
      Where is your sustainability in your dogma? Let’s pretend for a second that everyone on the planet was to switch to veganism… how the fuck are you gonna feed the planet? Has your fructose-laden mind even grasped that possibility? Have another hit of the cane juice dude, and go live in your fantasy world.
      Truth, indeed…

      • Ruben on February 28, 2011 at 04:02

        Because insects aren’t cute and cuddly, stupid! They aren’t good propaganda material.

      • Jason Sandeman on February 28, 2011 at 04:23

        @Ruben – LOL. I woudn’t consider a cow cute and cuddley either… especially when you follow it’s backside. LOL

      • Ruben on February 28, 2011 at 05:08

        Sorry, my fetish is apparently rare. To medium-rare.

      • Ruben on February 28, 2011 at 04:09

        But seriously: I agree with something I read here earlier. I somewhat admire him for making money off of gullible retards. Sure, he might be doing harm, sometimes irreparable harm, but a lot of people want desperately to be conned into belonging somewhere. Well, being vegetarian/vegan is a wonderfully trendy label to have. I do see the atraction. Simply because it is rare (fortunately!) people find it intriguing. Great conversation starter if you have nothing else, I guess.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 28, 2011 at 06:13

        I agree Ruben. Take the conmen and women who advertise “readings.” I once attended a conference where one of the speakers was the guy in the Florida AG office who took down Ms Cleo. Far as I’m concerned she was performing a valuable service by giving people a good lesson in how stupid they can be. I mean, anyone who would pay a reader to tell them what they already know deserves to be taken to the cleaners.

        With these raw fruit guys though, it’s kinda like drug dealers. I don’t give a shit about the adults, their rocket sled to hell if they want. But the kids have no choice in the matter. Google ‘vegan baby deaths.’

      • Ruben on February 28, 2011 at 06:34

        ‘Think of the children’ is a dangerous argument. Yes, the parents are hurting the child. But should we be able to force them to do otherwise? Proper nutritional education: great. But how would we force parents to feed their children optimally, when we don’t even have an accepted standard as to what optimal is? The end result will eventually be that literally every aspect of a child’s life is proscribed by government. Me, I’d consider tolerating the social darwinism of parental stupidity the lesser of two evils.

      • Richard Nikoley on February 28, 2011 at 06:41

        Well, sure Ruben, but that’s just because valid protection of real harm to children is co-opted by politicians for political gain.

        That doesn’t mean you stop protecting kids enduring real harm (by at least identifying it and speaking out about it as I do). I don’t advocate state initiation of force.

      • Joseph on February 28, 2011 at 07:29

        Richard’s justice: instead of getting physically restrained, the purveyor of dangerously idiotic bullshit gets publicly humiliated. People can throw poop or not as their conscience dictates, but at least everyone gives the target a second thought before accepting everything he (or she) says as some kind of gospel.

    • Richard Nikoley on February 28, 2011 at 07:25

      “The paleo/primal diet crew that say carbs make you fat, how come 99% of em have fat guts?”

      “My next vid will be even more truth. Be warned.”

      Since you obviously have no problem with lies & deceit to promote your catechism, here, let me help. Tons of material.

      Just go to my Real Results Category and Sisson’s Success Stories, reverse the before & after photos. Here’s a few specific suggestions.

      Then, of course, there’s me:

      Or, there’s Dave from Mark’s site:

      C’mon, Durianrider. We all know it’s not beyond you.

      “Those guys in the photos, they arent even raw/vegan. We put on a retreat in 09 and lots of different people attend em.”

      Yea, yea, I know. ABMGP – always be moving goal posts.

      “Is vegan dogma or human physiology?”

      Is creationism dogma or science? Same question. As someone quoted above in comments:

      “Vegeterianism, like creationism, simply reinvents human biology to suit an ideology.”

      – Paul Shepard, ‘Coming Home to the Pleistocene’, page 101

    • Ruben on February 28, 2011 at 02:22

      1. Guts? Because most start doing paleo to lose weight. Great argument, sonny. At least 95-Lb vegan he-men don’t have guts. Oh wait, see the videos above.

      2. You are right: those extremists aren’t extreme enough.

      3. Let’s see what they really eat, supplement with and “supplement” with. Claims are useless without objective proof (and the odd unannounced WADA-certified drug test)

      4. ? I was expecting a sentence. Woe is me.

    • Brian Scott on February 28, 2011 at 04:06

      “The paleo/primal diet crew that say carbs make you fat, how come 99% of em have fat guts?”
      [citation needed]

      Certainly, I would imagine some people on paleo diets to be overweight, even seriously so. I, for example, am 270 pounds. This is down from about 320 pounds that I weighed when I started paleoizing my diet. I do not think I could have achieved this on a diet similar to yours: one of the biggest changes I noticed contributing to both my overall feeling of wellness and my weight loss was elimination of sodas and juices from my diet, thus eliminating large amounts of fructose from my consumption. Eating as much fruit as you seem to would nullify that.

      • Sandy on February 28, 2011 at 09:16

        Sure, I also think many of us became paleo due to health problems. I’m gluten intolerant which lead to an AI disorder, weight gain and multiple food intolerances. Paleo was a god (Darwin) send. Even though most people don’t know what Paleo is and may look at you like you’ve lost your mind it’s easier than explaining that you can’t eat grains, soy, corn, potatoes, fruit and most sugars because they make you so sick you can barely function. A vegan diet would kill me, literally. Eating lots of grains and fruit already did enough damage as it is.

    • Melissa McEwen on February 28, 2011 at 09:16

      Oh man, look at all our fat guts

    • Sue on February 28, 2011 at 14:34

      So scared please don’t tell me more of your truth.
      Looking forward to seeing you make a complete fool of yourself – yet again.

    • D on February 28, 2011 at 16:50


      Sometimes life happens.

      Yes, I know what is good for me to eat. Yes, if I stick to it my body looks perfect. But you know what? Sometimes I don’t care. I’d rather go out and have drinks with friends. I’d rather splurge and eat a bowl of pasta. I like to eat cake from time to time. Life is fun and exciting and spur of the moment. It is not about sitting home alone eating 25 lbs of fruit.

      If my stomach sticks out a little bit, WHO cares!! I had fun!

  58. Cam on February 28, 2011 at 07:34

    “Studies have shown that a low-fat high-carbohydrate diet (15% fat, 65% CHO, 20% protein of total calories), typically eaten by athletes, increases inflammatory and decreases antiinflammatory immune factors, depresses antioxidants, and negatively affects blood lipoprotein ratios. Increasing total caloric intake by 25% to match energy expenditure and the dietary fat intake to 32% in athletes appears to reverse the negative effects on immune function and lipoprotein levels reported on a low-fat diet.”

    Great apes don’t get most there energy from sugar, they are hing gut fermenters and get most there energy from the fermentation of fiber into short chain fatty acids.

    %water %lipid %protein %sugar %fiber
    wild fruit 81.0 I 4.9 I 9.5 I 13.9 I 33.6
    domestic fruit 84.8 I 2.5 I 5.5 I 34.0 I 10.0
    domestic vegetables 90.3 I 1.9 I 18.8 I 24.0 I 10.0

    Nutrient content of wild fruit, it has less sugar and more fiber then vegetables

    There are plenty more examples why the 80/10/10 diet is fail

  59. Joseph on February 28, 2011 at 07:36

    Cherry-picking photos of overweight folks is very easy and proves nothing, merely confirming the biases of the people who already know everything. Vegans look at blokes like Mike Mahler and feel vindicated. Paleos look at Loren Cordain: no, Durianrider, they don’t. Paleos look at blokes like Erwan Le Corre for their vindication. Ultimately, however, the only really meaningful person any of us has to look at is the one in the mirror.

  60. Stephanie on February 28, 2011 at 10:48

    A vegan diet is so incredibly unhealthy! I hope they enjoy their diet cokes and oil-laden “dairy.” Wow that must make you feel so great! Give me my grass fed beef and organic chicken & eggs and they can have their vegan frozen TV dinners!

  61. I was a mess, a walking disaster if you will : My transformation « Primal Journal on February 28, 2011 at 10:57

    […] by Richard’s post (Link here) about lame ass vegan propaganda (”you can’t be paleo, lean, muscular and strong at the […]

  62. Former Vegan on February 28, 2011 at 11:02

    I was vegan for two year, raw vegan for about 6 months. All veg fruit, nuts, gluten free etc.

    My hair went to shit, I developed cystic acne, and I thought it was normal to have severe DOMs after every workout. I was also thin with a high body fat percentage.

    I’ve been mostly paleo for about 2 months now and seen a lot of improvement in all areas.

    And I’m disappointed to see how many people I admired and trusted with my health have come out of the closet and admit they are not really vegan.


    what really confuses me and turns me off from the whole “paleo movement” is this animosity. I see it over and over again and I’m completely confused.

    I have to agree with the anonymous person up there about poo flinging. I have read this blog in the past found it interesting and informative and had huge respect for the fact that it wasn’t afraid to look the problems that people have experienced with paleo diets right in the face and talk about them.

    But when I read some angry rant like this it makes me question the integrity of the entire blog. Like you said above, we’re all experimenting and different things are going to work for different people.

    • Paul C on February 28, 2011 at 11:45

      I don’t see how you can be completely confused if you have read past articles. Ego, politics, greed, and laziness have combined to make for a social disaster. It’s not enough to watch out for your individual choice, when your neighbor on welfare has a boy with autism that is forced to get his nutrition from vegan-influenced school lunches and the cheapest plant starches from stretched food stamps. OK that is my neighbor not yours. Maybe you’ll get angry for him too.

    • Richard Nikoley on February 28, 2011 at 12:16

      Former Vegan:

      “But when I read some angry rant like this…”

      You might stop to consider that _you_ might be the only one angry, and are projecting. See, I’m not angry at all. In fact, it thrills me to tears of joy when this kinda stuff comes up so I can do my trademark treatment on it and get so much delightfully fun action in the comments, now numbering at 230 and counting.

      I don’t understand why my animus towards radical veganism (which I do not hold toward certain, honest vegans or vegetarians in general) should confuse you (search vegan on my blog). Turn you off? I’m compelled to ask why, since you yourself saw the folly first hand. It damaged your health. How come you’re not upset about that enough to righteously tolerate, if not applaud, accurate vitriol and ridicule? Or, the thousands of young people on track to having their health damaged, perhaps permanently — as in the case with my friend, Lierre Kieth?

      And how about the vegan baby deaths?

      So, you’ve taken a stand in terms of your own health and I applaud you for that. Is it time that you take a stand on behalf of innocent, duped, and helpless (children) others?

      • Athonwy on March 1, 2011 at 13:39

        In regards to the supposed vegan baby deaths, once again, anecdotal evidence is worthless. I’m still waiting for you to produce some sound peer-reviewed science on any of your claims. Dr. Esselstyn has done the longest running (25+ years) medical study ever on a low fat vegan diet, and his peer-reviewed data is untouchable. Do you have anything similar?

        Also, in regards to taking a stand on behalf of the innocent: You just made a great argument for Veganism. Who is more innocent than the animals you eat? Personal choice ends when you take away someone else’s choice.

      • Jason Sandeman on March 1, 2011 at 14:19

        >>Who is more innocent than the animals you eat?

        Who is more innocent than the fungus you kill, the insects, the microorganisms in the water you drink? How about bacteria that you kill to disinfect?
        Purely a moot fucking point. IN ORDER FOR YOU TO FUCKING EAT, SOMETHING HAS TO DIE. End of story.

      • Athonwy on March 1, 2011 at 15:20

        So as long as someone is doing something bad, it matters not to what extent? So if I choose to insult you I might as well punch you? If I choose to punch you I might as well shoot you? Pretty weak argument Jason, and desperate as well. NOT end of story, as you can plainly see, though I’m sure you WISH it was.

      • Jason Sandeman on March 1, 2011 at 15:54

        How is it weak and desperate? Comparing insulting someone o punching them jut defies logic. You know it well; just like the VEGAN logic of not eating animals because you don’t believe in innocent deaths. Of course, ignoring the carpet bombing of insects, rodent control, fungicides, and not to mention the livelihood of people who are honest farmers. It defies logic, and I am not the one with a weak argument.
        In fact, let a vegan insult me with a punch. It won’t change much. He or she will still be an idiot with no point to prove, and I’ll still happily munch on my haunch of freshly killed meat.
        Just don’t tell me I’m wrong, unless you can back it up.
        Also, YOU decide to be a VEGAN. Your kids should get a choice too. WHEN they are old enough to decide or themselves. I ain’t saying the government should step in – I don’t believe in that. But, the COMMUNITY should step in, cause it’s the right thing to do.

      • Jason Sandeman on March 2, 2011 at 02:09

        I have to repeat myself, because you just aren’t getting it. That’s what a teacher does. (Especially when he is reminded that a dumbass JUST doesn’t know that he is one… and thinks he’s right.)
        My argument is not what you lay out. You interject that. You go further to say my logic dictates that it would be okay to kill me, my dog, Amazonian Indians in order to eat. Well, that is stretching it a LOT. Again, who is stretching logic here?

        Here is my argument plain and simple, dumbed down a little for you:

        Whatever you put into your mouth to feed yourself has to die.

        Who gives a fuck about my dog, unless you try to eat him? (Which in that point, you would find my angry, meat-eating ass in your face.)

        So, please – if you are going to use logic, please be logical about it. You know, don’t make assumptions – just look at the logic. I will repeat it AGAIN for you in the hopes you might get it. (Then again, does a DUMBASS ever know that he is one?)

        Whatever you put into your mouth to feed yourself has to die.

        That means the vegetable you are eating has to die. The plants you are eating had to be sprayed to combat fungus/bugs/rodents/other pests (which usually killed them) The meat you are eating came from an animal that had to die, the water that you are drinking had creatures in it that had to die.

        I never started the comparison, YOU did. You said, and I quote, “You just made a great argument for Veganism. Who is more innocent than the animals you eat? ”

        I am making the argument that all things that you eat are technically innocent. Plants, animals, bugs (if you are into that) and water.

        In fact, there is a sect of Indian vegetarians that will not eat anything that has contact with animals. Including vegetables that have been grown in manure, or any vegetable that might have insects in them.

        I hope that helped out, Anthonwy!

      • Athonwy on March 1, 2011 at 22:24

        I wasn’t the one making the comparison, you were. You basically just repeated yourself, yet you say I am illogical? You’re obviously not very good at this. I’ll spell it out implicitly: YOU are making the argument that as long as SOMETHING has to die for someone to eat that it does not matter to what extent. So, per your logic, since something has to die for me to eat, killing YOU, or perhaps your dog, or say, a whole bunch of Amazonian Indians, is totally acceptable, since something has to die, right? Keep in mind that YOU made this argument, not me. Contrarily, I think it DOES matter to what extent things have to suffer or die for me to eat, therefore I attempt to live a lifestyle that reduces that harm to the extent that I am able.

      • Jason Sandeman on March 3, 2011 at 14:03

        Oh, okay – I’ll bite (pun intended.)
        In the case of eating my dog – trust me – if it meant my life or his via starvation, well, “It’s been a good life pup!”
        As to what stops me from being on someone’s plate? Interesting question. I believe you are trying to goad me into saying something like, “the law”, or “society” so that you could turn that argument back on me.
        Indeed, there is nothing stopping someone from putting my ass on their plate (aside from my vigorous insistence that I am no easy meat.) To go further, if I was in the woods, or in some wilderness somewhere, and an animal decided that I was on the menu, there is fuck all a stick bag of vegan bones could do, much less protest about it.
        As for logic and consistency in arguments? What argument? You stretch the logic out, searching for a way to justify your nonsensical dogmatic enforcement of children to YOUR fucking lifestyle.
        Indeed, let’s turn things around here, in case you want an argument, and go anti-vegan: And this is for SURE going to be a good post fodder!

        What is more innocent than the plants that you kill? Why do they deserve to die feeding you when they are meant to be for the animals you are supposed to be eating?
        In fact, because of your indulgence of soy, you have inadvertently cause a mono agricultural empire, and the animals have to suffer eating the byproducts of your selfish diet. Animals were not meant to eat soy or wheat byproducts, but the farmers have no choice but to feed these creatures that junk because of the demand for fucking tofu!
        Plus, thanks to all the pesticides dumped around the area to keep those bananas alive, and all the fossil fuels to transport them all over the world in their various stages of ripeness, we have holes in the ozone layer for your efforts. Feed the world indeed!
        No, if you weren’t so fucking clueless and selfish, you would see the way nature intended things:
        The animals, (ruminants mostly – and for your vegan-addled minds that means they eat fucking GRASS and chew cud,) fulfill a purpose.
        They give us milk
        Their manure fertilizes our crops (mainly vegetables, some grains.)
        Their meat feeds a lot of people (a fuck of a LOT more than just 18 bags of grains.)
        Their leather can go to make many different items of daily use
        Their bones provide us with sustenance (bone broth) and with fertilizer as well. (Bone meal.)

        In return, we eat far less, because we are sustained with a little bit of meat. We don’t have to waste so many resources getting our sustenance.

        Indeed, I would argue that it is cruel to be vegetarian, in more ways than not.

      • Jason Sandeman on March 3, 2011 at 14:38

        Richard – Anthonwy has given me a great idea for a post:

        Pop over and check it out if you are so inclined. Cheers!

        Thanks Anthonwy!

      • Jason Sandeman on March 3, 2011 at 17:33

        Athonwy – hey, speaking of observation.. Have you ever wondered about how autocorrect works on iPhones? Seems like it doesn’t like your name, no offense intended. You are making an assumption that I lack intelligence based on a simple autocorrect error.
        I see someone trying to look smart by arguing by analogy. You are desperately grasping at something to render the argument invalid by A created fallacy. The problem is you have nothing to qualify your statements as facts. Example: speaking about how much foo goes into 1 pound of meat. The PETA assumption that it is inefficient to feed cattle corn, grains, soy, and other feed is TOTALLY correct. Funny how our cattle are fed with subsidized grains? You know, corn which is also used for HFCS, vegetable proteins, fillers, and other lovely vegetable friendly uses.
        Let’s invalidate that argument for a second here. You know that mono agriculture is NOT mainly for cattle use, right? Don’t kid yourself, cattle are fed the byproducts of that “food” AFTER it is used or all that heart-healthy “food” like whole grain breads, honey nut cheerios that help your vitamin d. Levels.
        Funny even how PETA neglects to mention the energy cost of producing fruits grains, and vegetable products out of locale and season! EVEN more interesting is the refusal to look at sustainability of that model. If we all stopped eating animal products, how are we gonna feed the entire world?
        Now, let the creatures eat naturally? Now the cost is vastly reduced. No longer need all the energy to produce few for the animal that it wasn’t designed to eat anyway. As a result, the meat is more dense, nutritious, and filling. In fact, with 1 poun of meat, you could feed a family of 8 people. I have seen it done. Try that with a pound of grain.

      • Jason Sandeman on March 3, 2011 at 19:01

        >>I don’t eat much soy, and try to eat as local as possible, and as organic as possible. Your appeal to “nature” intending things is nonsensical.

        >>Nature is a human concept, and cannot intend anything, that’s just mystical mumbo-jumbo.

        Interesting. I think you are trying to discount my personification of “nature.” See, we do that so you can explain abstract concepts, like – well, Nature. As for mystical mumbo jumbo – that’s just downright naive. Even if you do follow logic, (like you claim to do,) you can see the validity of the concepts of how creatures evolved to eat certain food. We personify it so it is a little easier to grasp, and not so long to talk about. Again, you are grasping at nothing to try and disprove a point.

        >>As for the plants being killed, well, it takes (x)-pounds of plants to produce 1 pound of meat, where x is always a number greater than 1, so if someone were concerned with doing least harm to the plants then a vegan diet would do the least harm. Most soy is grown to feed animals for consumption, not humans, so if soy monocropping is your concern, then encourage people to stop eating soy-fed animals, and you will eliminate 80% of soy crops.

        That’s a nice theory there. Let’s take it apart for a second: First off, eat a pound of vegetables verses a pound of meat. How long can you go on that? Pound for pound, meat is a more efficient food than a vegetable will ever be.

        As for soy being grown for mostly animal consumption – if you want to insult the intelligence of people on “teh interwebs” as you call it, at least get some facts straight. A simple search on Google will give you what you need there. Most soybean production is for Soybean Oils, and the byproducts of that are split into 2 forms – animal feed, and soy derivatives, which include flours, stabilizers, food additives, etc. Bam! There was your argument about reducing 80% of soy crops. It is because of the “veggie” alternative that we use that junk in our foods, and they are making us sick.

        >>I could go on, but you seem more interested in insulting and swearing than having an actual discussion. Even if your arguments weren’t transparently flawed, the fact that you resort to ad hominem attacks and inflammatory language as a way to bolster your rhetoric is quite an indicator of the substance of your logic.

        Again, I see this as someone giving up. Poor Athonwy – having a hard time coming up with any other holes to poke into logic to get your point across? There is this thing I learned a long time ago… stop being a STUDENT and become a TEACHER. What that means is – stop regurgitating shit people tell you as gospel, get out there and ACTUALLY learn something. Then teach it.

        Logic has a place in life, but it is not ALL there is to it. I could sit here all day and poke holes in your logic as well. (Or lack thereof – you at best have a simplistic grasp of the rudiments of logic. Enough to be a troll, no more.)

        The problem with it, it’s just too easy. I have seen the argument for the last 20 years. The same regurgitated shit they (PETA) told our high school that long ago. They still weren’t able to answer this question, maybe you will be able to with your super dooper avaczed logic skillz:

        Sure, it takes 18 lbs of grain to feed a cow per pound of meat at the end of its life. What if we just let it graze instead, like it was supposed to? If that was allowed, how many people can that cow feed? How many people can survive on those bags of grains instead?
        Careful though – remember what we send to 3rd world countries in “aid”. That’s right, rice and grains! Seems like they still have a problem out there, right?
        Finally, let’s just say that the whole world becomes vegetarians. Where are we going to grow all that food? If one needs 2000 calories a day to live (if you believe in calories in/calories out) then it stands to reason that we will need vast amounts of vegetables. See, they don’t give that much in calories, or carbs. Now we have a problem!
        Can you solve it? Please tell me how we will sustain a world wide vegetarian people.

      • Athonwy on March 3, 2011 at 12:56

        Jason, you still haven’t made any convincing logical argument as to why you, or your dog, are not fair game for the plate. Actually, you made an argument exactly in favour of eating whatever we want, since something has to die, right? Where do you draw the line, and why do you draw it where you do? Why, in your world view, is eating an animal OK, but eating your dog or a human is not? You are not making a consistent argument.

        Let’s put this question out to all the readers: Who has been more logical and consistent in their arguments? Me, or Jason? Please speak up, I welcome any criticisms or rebukes.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 3, 2011 at 12:58


        In your view, what prerequisites are essential in order for a living organism to possess moral rights?

      • Emily Deans, M.D. on March 3, 2011 at 13:06

        What? Because I eat a cow I think it might be okay to eat my children? Are you insane? I hate philosophers.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 3, 2011 at 14:45

        My friend Lierre Kieth, 20-yr vegan now ex, lays this out in substantial, page turning detail in “The Vegetarian Myth.”

        She’s a fiction writer so the prose is excellent and impassioned, in my view. And, I read it before I became a friend of Lierre. And, our politics are about as far apart as you can get

      • Sandy on March 3, 2011 at 14:50

        Sorry Anthonwy, Jason wins this round. In order for something to be capable of being innocent it has to be capable of being guilty, and that’s not how nature works. Nature is the ultimate moral relativist. It doesn’t give a shit. But what you fail to take into consideration is that different species evolved different mating and reproductive strategies. I had a pet Budgett’s frog years ago, interesting little critters. Aggressive as hell too. When bred in captivity they have to be separated because the juveniles eat each other. May the best frog win . . . . As humans are social creatures we evolved not eating each other, except in mostly ritualistic ways. Dogs as we know them were selectively bred as helpers and later companions. Dogs are basically wolves suspended in their “puppy” stage. We like them, they’re cute and playful as well as being useful. Some cultures do in fact eat them, but they don’t generally keep them as companions at the same time.

        Morality doesn’t actually exist. Every act that we humans assign the label of “moral” either benefits us in some way or is a cultural artifact. On the other hand, each of us is free to assign the label to whatever we choose, and if there’s a consensus we turn it into a law or it becomes a taboo. Those in our ancestral past who couldn’t abide were weeded out, either by outright killing or not being allowed to reproduce, until we ended up with a majority that was pretty happy to get along.

        Animals are not humans, although humans are animals, so it really doesn’t behoove us to give much of a shit about them beyond their usefulness. Pets that we take into our homes as companions are a different story, although there are some people who can’t even muster that. We become outraged because we are conditioned to. Cows? Not so much. I have enough empathy to not want the animals I eat to be beaten, tortured or abused in any way, but I sure as hell am not about to afford them the same protection as I do other humans.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 3, 2011 at 14:58

        sandy, so, so happy to welcome smart to the conversation

        But I’m going to disagree with you that morality does not exist. That said, I’m not talking about space alien and ancient text morality, but natural morality.

        Now think. Tell me what you think morality really is.

      • Athonwy on March 3, 2011 at 15:00

        I don’t eat much soy, and try to eat as local as possible, and as organic as possible. Your appeal to “nature” intending things is nonsensical.

        Nature is a human concept, and cannot intend anything, that’s just mystical mumbo-jumbo.

        As for the plants being killed, well, it takes (x)-pounds of plants to produce 1 pound of meat, where x is always a number greater than 1, so if someone were concerned with doing least harm to the plants then a vegan diet would do the least harm. Most soy is grown to feed animals for consumption, not humans, so if soy monocropping is your concern, then encourage people to stop eating soy-fed animals, and you will eliminate 80% of soy crops.

        I could go on, but you seem more interested in insulting and swearing than having an actual discussion. Even if your arguments weren’t transparently flawed, the fact that you resort to ad hominem attacks and inflammatory language as a way to bolster your rhetoric is quite an indicator of the substance of your logic.

      • Athonwy on March 3, 2011 at 15:03

        Lierre Keith’s book was so full of fallacious arguments and illogical conclusions that I actually laughed out loud while reading it. Fiction writer indeed!

      • Athonwy on March 3, 2011 at 15:04

        Oh, and Emily, I’m not surprised you hate philosophers, the illogical almost always do.

      • Athonwy on March 3, 2011 at 15:06

        Sandy, you said:

        “I have enough empathy to not want the animals I eat to be beaten, tortured or abused in any way, but I sure as hell am not about to afford them the same protection as I do other humans.”

        Yet you fail to say why?

      • Athonwy on March 3, 2011 at 15:17

        Also, Jason, I think the very first step towards understanding might be observation, which you are clearly not good at. You misspelled my name every single time. You even quoted my response, and my name is clearly spelled RIGHT THERE, and you STILL misspelled it. If you’re going to put yourself out there on teh interwebz for the world to see you may want to consider being slightly more observant and intelligent.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 3, 2011 at 15:27

        “Nature is a human concept, and cannot intend anything”

        Super nice admission. That should be enough said. I suppose it means that without humans, nothing would exist. Perhaps the world is only 5,000 yrs old. Guess it fits the catechism.

        Anyway, I have to source meat and other stuff for a Thai curry for guests. Then cook . Don’t know when I’ll be back, but I will be back.

      • Sandy on March 3, 2011 at 16:20

        Innate morality, absolutely, but I don’t know that I’d call it morality so much as empathy. I’m a bit of a reductionist, “unweaver of rainbows” if you will. Like Dawkins’ “Selfish Gene” I tend to view even selfless acts, if I sit and ponder them, as ultimately selfish. I don’t really ponder them in my day to day going about of my business. I appreciate generosity that I’ve received and feel good about doing things for others without needing to analyze everything. But the selfishness comes into play because we want to be liked, want to be a member of a group and that’s what groups require. It forwards our goals. We benefit from cooperation. But we don’t ever have to be aware of it and can continue on being “moral” and feeling good about it.

      • Sandy on March 3, 2011 at 16:47

        Because I don’t enjoy cruelty for cruelty’s sake. What purpose would abusing an animal serve? What would I gain from it?

      • Richard Nikoley on March 3, 2011 at 18:02

        sandy, here’s a mind puzzle. Suppose there was absolutely no notion of space aliens with sooper powe3rz and you cam up with the idea of morality.

        How do you construct and define it? Trust me, there is a way, and it’s all natural. Moreover, ridiculously simple.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 3, 2011 at 18:09

        Sandy. Please. Come on. Your hypothetical is easily disproven by observing how much unmarried and unattached women go out seeking to get pregnant, just so they can go through the ultimate joy of having an abortion.


      • Richard Nikoley on March 3, 2011 at 18:19

        you’ve shown nothing here to make me believe you’ve truly read it. I know it has flaws. Point me to at least the three reviews you’ve done, as I have done.

        Im increasingly seeing a poseur, but at least still clever. But here’s what I do know for sure. You are incapable of logically sorting out ethical issues, ‘caue the stuff you were taught and refeflexively regurgitate isn’t playing here.

        I have simple questions for you, already posted. Think hard or run away.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 3, 2011 at 18:22

        Or those who, Antonwy, keep their logic in a very small but also very consistent box.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 3, 2011 at 18:25

        “Yet you fail to say why?”

        And I have asked you why, in terms of rights and morality and am awaiting an answer.

      • Athonwy on March 3, 2011 at 23:17

        I don’t have an answer as to how we will sustain a world vegetarian population, but simple math informs me that if 7 billion people were to follow a paleo diet there would not be a wild animal left on earth within two years. The only way your paleo lifestyle is sustainable is because you live in an elite society that supports it. Paleo works in SMALL populations with LARGE amounts of land, which is what you had during the paleolithic era. It does not work with 7+ billion people competing for resources. So, either a lot of people need to die, or we need to find a solution that will definitely involve human agriculture on a massive scale. Which do you prefer?

      • Jason Sandeman on March 4, 2011 at 14:30


        …. Even if you were to turn all plant agriculture into animal grazing you would still run out of food in a decade at the most. Do the numbers yourself if you don’t believe me. Let’s pretend that Jason’s idea of feeding a family of 8 on 1 lb of meat were viable (it’s not, but we’re pretending, alos, he never said how LONG they would survive of that one pound, maybe a few days)….

        Athonwy, this has been done for generations in Asian culture. In fact, the whole China Study looked into that.
        Now, a more relevant question would be, how much can that pound of meat sustain someone (or some people) before they would need to eat more? How long will a pound of grains last? How about a pound of lettuce?

        In fact, check out my latest post where I made a Beef Broccoli stir fry recipe more traditional, with enough to feed up to 6-8 people, with a side of small rice.

        Also, look into the whole biological aspect of things. We have almost reached capacity given our current agriculture. The demand has risen for factory meats due to the industrialized nations forgoing their traditional diets. Supply will not meet the demand, and you are already seeing the repercussions of that.

        Diabetes, cancer, and all other lovely diseases. See, there is no vegan alternative, because VEGAN ain’t evolutionary. Yes, we all ate bananas almost all waking hours 50 million years ago, but then we evolved…

      • Sandy on March 4, 2011 at 06:24

        Fuckin’ A! Even us attached women think they’re a blast. I had two just last month!

      • Sandy on March 4, 2011 at 06:32

        I’m not braining very well on this one. Y’ever build your own house? It’s kicking my ass and I’m not even doing much of the building part.

        All that comes to mind is basically anything that gets your ass kicked for doing it to someone else is gonna be “immoral”. Anything that either meets the approval of others or has no effect on others happiness or well being could either be moral or having no morality judgment.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 4, 2011 at 12:43

        “simple math informs me that if 7 billion people were to follow a paleo diet there would not be a wild animal left on earth within two years.”

        That’s nonsense on its face since famed meat is far less costly than hunting. That’s why most hunters nowadays are either rich or they are very skilled at it and spend a lot of time at it.

        The notion that paleo is not sustainable is disproven by the simple fact of the paleolithic period. Turn all the massive acreage growing grains back into grass, put cattle & buffalo to graze, and you have a true self-sustaining ecosystem from which you can extract far more kcal per square foot than with grains, and its self fertilizing.

      • Athonwy on March 4, 2011 at 13:39

        Richard you are comparing a period with a maximum population of 500 million to one with over 7 billion people. That is a completely unreasonable comparison. Even if you were to turn all plant agriculture into animal grazing you would still run out of food in a decade at the most. Do the numbers yourself if you don’t believe me. Let’s pretend that Jason’s idea of feeding a family of 8 on 1 lb of meat were viable (it’s not, but we’re pretending, alos, he never said how LONG they would survive of that one pound, maybe a few days), you still have a need for 1/8 pound of meat per person per day. Of course, if you ate this way the constipation problems would be pretty severe after a few weeks, gotta have some fiber in there. So, 1/8 pound a day per person x 7 billion. That’s 875 million pounds of meat per day, or 319 BILLION pounds of meat per year. That’s about 500 million cows per year. At their very height the buffalo herds of North America were estimated at a maximum of 50 million. So, all the buffalo that EVER existed would be gone in 1/10th of a year. Where next, the wildebeest herds? Let’s see, currently numbering around 1 million, you might be able to get those numbers up to 50 million or so if you displaced most Africans and returned the land to grazing. So you got another 1/10th of the year there. Where next? The ocean? Almost all the large fish are already gone, but given extremely strict regulations you might be able to get them to make a comeback, from which you could maybe extract 80 – 200 million pounds of seafood a year. Still not enough. Keep in mind that’s only 1/8 pound of meat per day! Most people consume at least twice that in America, and people on the paleo diet probably consume even more than that. So, where is all this magical meat to come from? I’d love to hear if you have a different version of these numbers. It looks to me like you got yourself a bit of a problem there.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 4, 2011 at 13:44


        And the very vast majority of the Earth is still unpopulated fly-over country.

        How many meat eaters of the 7 billions on earth do you suppose there are now, even without agricultural lands being tuned back to pasture?

      • Athonwy on March 4, 2011 at 14:26

        What is your source for the idea that the vast majority of earth is unpopulated? According to the National Geographic Society that is completely untrue. There are very few places on earth where one can go to be away from human habitation, and most of those places would not support grazing either. You can’t grow cows in Antarctica, or the Sahara.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 4, 2011 at 14:45

        Anthonwy, do you really think it behoves you to be obtuese and play dumb when I’m pretty sure you know exactly what I mean?

      • TandooriChicken on March 4, 2011 at 16:58

        Actually Jason, I have to correct you on the Indian vegetarians bit. The Hindu definition of vegetarianism is simply no meat. The belief of the particular sect you describe, the Jains, is that they should not consume anything that is the origin of life. So in addition to no meat, they eat no eggs, no seeds (including beans), and no bulbs (onions, garlic). Leaf vegetables are okay, roots are okay (because roots can regenerate themselves even if one part is cut off), and even dairy is okay (doesn’t harm the animal). They hire people to wash their vegetables for them so they don’t accidentally kill the insects that might be hiding in them. They are truly the ethical eaters that sacrifice the minimum amount they have to ensure life goes on, not these militant vegan basketcases.

      • Jeanmarie on March 11, 2011 at 20:48

        “Animals are not humans, although humans are animals, so it really doesn’t behoove us to give much of a shit about them beyond their usefulness.”
        I would take issue with this. It does behoove us to give a shit about the animals. I say that as a grateful meat eater. We’d better care about the animals and the other species that share this world with us, or we’ll wipe ourselves out. Well that’s what we seem to be doing.
        The alternative to silly veganism isn’t disregard for animals because we’re going to eat them. I know some meat eaters don’t like to think about animal intelligence or animal emotions, they want to believe they’re ‘just dumb animals’ so they don’t have to feel bad about eating meat. To each his own, but for me, I embrace eating animals if the animals have been treated to a good life and a humane death. I raise chickens, mostly for the eggs, but I’ve started learning to slaughter them. I find it difficult but it feels important to take responsibility for being an omnivore.
        As Temple Grandin says (at least according to the HBO biopic of her): “Nature is cruel, but we don’t have to be.” Said not to justify being a vegan, but to explain why bother to design humane cattle-handling facilities. Amen to that.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 1, 2011 at 14:11


        Mail or wire $500 per hour for as many hours of my time you want, and I’ll get right on it for you.

        Otherwise, you have the search function on the blog and about 1,000 posts in the general health category, many citing peer review studies and other studies. There are also sources like Hyperlid where Peter the UK veterinarian does almost nothing but tear apart BS studies and/or cites studies supporting his views. There’s also Chris Masterjohn, Denise Minger who obliterated The China Study (and every honest person knows it), and Dr. Shephen Guyenet of Whole Health Source who also deals mostly in studies. His specialty is the diet and health of hinter-gatherers, pastoralists and other non-industrialized peoples.

        God luck with your search, especially if you’re honest and sincere about it.

      • Athonwy on March 1, 2011 at 15:22

        Your time is not worth $500 per hour, stop kidding yourself. I appreciate the other referrals though, and I’ll look into them.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 1, 2011 at 17:34

        I hate to keep having to point this out to various commenters.

        “Your time is not worth $500 per hour.” TO WHOM?

        That it’s not worth that to you is both obvious and understandable and plus, this is not my expertise, finance and debt restructuring and settlement is, and I have made as much as $30,000 per hour on big deals, for results that saved clients far more than the fee.

        You may not have been reading here for long but some recent posts have revealed that my fonancial and real estate losses so far in the economic downturn are around a half mil.

        At any rate, that’s the price. But the blog is free.

      • Athonwy on March 1, 2011 at 22:30

        In order to prove that your time is worth $500 per hour you would need to total your hours worked in the last period (month, quarter, year) and then divide how much you actually earned by that number. Would that number be $500 or higher? I doubt it. Earning $30,000 in one hour is a deceitful measure of your actual worth, since you are not factoring in all the hours you worked without getting paid $30,000. I know a laser eye surgeon who makes $5000 per 15 minute procedure, so you could theoretically say he makes $20,000 an hour, but that would be wrong. He spent 12 years in medical school, and many years after that developing his laser procedure, not to mention all the time he spends doing paperwork where he is not earning money, so in the end he makes about $300-$400 an hour.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 2, 2011 at 03:57

        yes, yes, Anthonwy, but you are missing the point. Hell, why stop there? Certainly anyone who works for any significant fee has spent many hours in thought about his profession, so factor it all in and you can get the number as low as you want.

        The point is that doesn’t apply to what it’s worth to anyone else at a discreate hour in time.

        No one can prove they are absolutely worth anything. That is determined exclusively by the purchaser. And any two purchasers will value differently more often than identically.

      • VW on March 1, 2011 at 17:02

        Isn’t Esselstyn’s work exclusively with heart attack patients?

        Not sure it makes any difference… maybe it does; maybe it doesn’t. Just trying to clarify the nature of Dr. Esselstyn’s work and contribution to the discussion.

        Oh, and pay me $500 while you’re at it. Just because I will put it to good use on my upcoming vacation in April.

  63. Paul C on February 28, 2011 at 11:24

    Durianrider’s suspicion about paleo juicing is understandable. If you are a walking skeleton with a big ego, convincing yourself that you are the ideal is easy, therefore anyone else must be unnaturally enhanced.

    Before leaning heavily paleo, I used to joke that I was going to hang around high-school weight rooms and pick up some vitamins (Barry Bonds-style vitamins that is) to bulk up my thin frame. Now that the bulk is happening naturally, and in a very brutish manner such as trap and hamstring growth, I am beginning to wonder if my former joke will be taken seriously.

  64. I was a mess, a real walking disaster : My transformation « Primal Journal on February 28, 2011 at 16:07

    […] by Richard’s post (Link here) about lame ass vegan propaganda (”you can’t be paleo, lean, muscular and strong at the […]

  65. EdwinB on February 28, 2011 at 16:33

    I browsed through some of the vegan websites, 30-fruity nuts per day or somesuch. A question leaps to mind – does raw veganism-frutarianism attract the cognitively impaired or does it cause congnite impairment. From the comments and posts somes of the fruit fondlers seem to advocate murdering anyone who eats meat (not an exageration). Now a mind that equates the life of a domesticated cow, bred, born, and raised to be food (this isn’t a wild speciies of cow roaming the jungles of Narnia) with the life of a normal human being has severe issues. They are bat shit crazy to use the technical term.

    One of the chief fruit fondlers, asked a cow in a video possibly a young bull if it wants a massage. Around these parts we tend to frown on bull milking.

    • Tom on February 28, 2011 at 17:57

      “One of the chief fruit fondlers, asked a cow in a video possibly a young bull if it wants a massage.”

      Maybe there is a use for the banana-eaters after all. I found this vintage production on YouTube, so you know it’s true:

      • EdwinB on February 28, 2011 at 18:02

        Tom, great find those cows get 6 bottles of beer and 8 hours of massage a day ! I’ll feel even better about eating Kobe next time, that’s like a redneck spa!

  66. Shawn Piper on February 28, 2011 at 16:51

    I’m a proponent of individual liberties. I think we should all have the freedom to eat however we like. If someone wants to eat bananas, fast food, or anything else, for 80% of their daily calories, let them. If they want to claim on the internet (or anywhere else) that everyone who doesn’t live like them is in an imbecile, that should also be tolerated as freedom of speech.

    That said, we should all be held accountable for our actions. And our health is the ultimate source of personal accountability. I look at those vegans, emaciated from living on a diet of mostly fruit, and I see accountability. If they look so bad at a young age, I can’t imagine they’ll be doing much better as they get through middle age (if they even make it that far!). And ideally, if they took a gamble on their nutrition and ended up with bad health, they should have to ultimately pay more for health care as well (right behind all those obese people on the SAD). The same applies to us, if we’re wrong about the paleo lifestyle, then we must take accountability for that.

    What I can’t stand is when vegans, or anyone else, goes out of their way to harm others or impede my personal right to make my own nutritional decisions. Examples are raising a child under a form of radical veganism / putting them on a diet of sugar and fast food. Or going out of their way to alter laws to prohibit me from eating meat, attacking farm owners, etc.

    I rarely get involved with these types of debates, as anyone who would eat 30 bananas a day has to be a little nuts (like the overly religious). I just wanted to chime in and say that you shouldn’t let them get the better of you. Anger just vindicates their belief that paleo is everything wrong.

    My parents own a small farm in rural Washington. We raise goats, cows, chickens, ducks, and turkeys. We used to sell at the farmer’s market, but now its more for personal consumption and a hobby in their retirement. A few years ago, some vegan action group (students from Evergreen State College), vandalized our property. They slashed fuel lines on our tractor, let out the animals from their pens, and spray painted our barn. Well… after calling the authorities, we fixed the damage and went on with our life. They came back twice more and when we failed to stop farming or react in any vindicating sort of way, they eventually decided to leave us (and our neighbors) alone. I guess the lesson here is to just live your life and not get too caught up in the dramas of others. If we don’t argue with these weirdos, eventually they will realize no one wants to pay attention to them and they will go on with their lives. By engaging these people, we’re basically saying “your nutritional perspective is valid enough to address in an argument.” I personally don’t think it is even worth that.

    Be strong!

  67. CrossFit Extreme Fitness » 3/1/11 on February 28, 2011 at 19:01

    […] Article of the Day: Vegan Lies and Their Stick Figure People – Feed the Animal […]

  68. Katie on February 28, 2011 at 23:16

    This is the first time I’ve come across this blog and I find some of the comments very disheartening from a human perspective… I have met Durian Rider in the past and know about his uneducated ranting and raving and would like to say that he doesn’t represent all vegans. He certainly does not represent me. The types of animal activists who go about damaging property also don’t represent all vegans, including me. The vast majority of vegans do their own thing, living their lives according to their values. It can be controversial, but so is anything that goes against “the norm”.

    I know you all have your own dietary style and reasons for doing so. Vegans have the same thing. If you don’t understand or just plain disagree, fine, but why spend so much time criticising all vegans based on your experience with Harley/Durian Rider? Like all groups of people, there are some very verbal crackpots who get plenty of air time because everyone loves a controversy, and there are many normal people doing their best to live their lives according to their values. It’s like saying those TV evangelists who incite violence or prejudice against others and take all their followers’ money to build mansions represent all Christians, therefore all Christians are nutjobs. I could find plenty of blogs and sites which now confirm this view. But in reality, the vast majority of Christians go about their lives doing their own thing, living their lives according to their values and would no doubt find this assumption horribly offensive.

    I’m so sorry if Harley is your only experience with vegans :-(. I do wish, though, that I could have read some of the followers of this blog saying something like, “yeah that Harley is one f*cked up dude, but I’m sure not all vegans are like him”. This blog is my only experience with people following a Paleo diet and I think it would be foolish of me to believe that all Paleos are so judgemental based on this entry and the following comments.

    Vegan diets (like many different types of diet) *done right* are healthy for all ages. That claim is supported by plenty of research. Vegans don’t hold the monopoly on supplementing their diets – the vitamin industry is a multi-billion dollar industry! 0.02% of the population could not hold this industry afloat!

    I don’t know much about the Paleo diet so I won’t comment on that other than to say I’m sure that there are varying levels of health associated with it depending on how much individuals understand the nutrition behind it.

    So, as a sign-off, I’m sorry if your only experience with vegans/veganism is just with Harley. I ask that you remember that the minority rarely represents the majority. I am sure that if I knew many of you on a personal level that we would probably get along very well!

    • Ruben on March 1, 2011 at 00:00


      Your post is very considerate. Thank you. However, I still disagree with you, based on the numbers. You say that vegans consist of only 0.02% of the population. Assuming that’s true, and it’s spread relatively evenly throughout countries and communities, then that 0.02% is making an inordinate amount of noise. If a group is both so tiny and yet so very vocal, it stands to reason that most in that group are NOT moderate.

      Speaking purely from personal experience, I have had three vegans in my life. All three were impossible to live with. Not because they don’t eat meat (more meat for me is always great!) but because they all tried to make everyone else conform to their standard. That could be blatant (openly calling friends and family murderers), petty (not allowing me to use their frying pan for baking eggs), or insidious (‘casually’ mentioning that they’d hate to see me die at 50 — while I’m eating a steak). But so far I have not personally met a vegan that I didn’t despise.

      Granted, maybe the good ones just keep their mouths shut and I never even find out they are vegans. Then, them being only 0.02% of the population, I apparently have been extremely unlucky in meeting three of them that are despicable. With bad luck like that, I might as well never buy a lottery ticket.

    • Sue on March 1, 2011 at 03:18

      Katie you must be new to reading blogs etc because most vegans I’ve come across are similar to Harley.

    • rob on March 1, 2011 at 16:00

      I’m sure Vegans and regular people would get along fine in real life, it’s not like there have been hate crimes reported against Vegans (“It eats the steak or it gets the hose again”).

      I get along fine with people who have multiple piercings too, I just choose not to engage in multiple piercings and don’t see the point of it.

      There is no stopping fashion, it changes with the seasons and eventually what was old becomes new again.

      And so it goes.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 1, 2011 at 18:21

        Rob, you make some good points, particularly because of the implications.

        The chief and principle antagonism going on at least some decades now is between collectivism and individualism. By consequence, collective designs of steal and spend means that money is taken from some, and spent in ways they would not choose, even though they may be perfectly happy to “pitch in” for a functioning society. A chief example would be the anti-abortionists. While I think they’re bonkers, they should not be forced to pay for that which they find abhorrent. By contrast, what another woman does with her own body is none of their business and they ought not be seeking to use those same stolen funds to force women who don’t share their values into having children they don’t want. So it turns both ways and collectivism is the root culprit. The antagonism is endless. The profiteers are the politicians. The fools are the voters who put up with the charade year after year and decade after decade.

        What would happen if they held an election and nobody showed up? Think about that.

        In today’s practical politics, it’s all about who goes into the cannibal pot and who gets to feast. Lefties are lottery players. They’re confident they can game the system enough, go through enough red tape, sit foe enough hours in government offices at the “customer service” window, join enough activist causes and unions…that they’re pretty confident they’ll feast. They make a net profit. Righties invoke the ancient diktats of a space alien with sooper pow3rz. In short, it’s a hopeless mess.

        To the ethical gimps who’ve commented about shit flinging toward vegans or other complaints about negativity, let’s be clear. Let’s even set aside the fact that this post was primarily a defense of those who were wronged. So were left with a simple distinction for which the foregoing should be instructive. Listen carefully:

        No paleo, or anyone I can imagine has any desire to force vegans away from their folly. But the inverse does not hold.

        They are using your “taxes” (I do use euphemisms for theft, sometimes, just for clarity) against you to promote a public agenda that will make it increasingly difficult for you to enjoy your meat.

        Hell, in ten or 20 years, you may have to go outside to eat your meat.

  69. Kim on March 1, 2011 at 00:25

    You crack me up, Richard! Your posts are so lively and full of good information. I love the stick figure images. Our neighbor is a vegetarian (not vegan as of yet), and he eats a ton of bananas per day. Guess what? He’s a stick figure, too. It’s no surprise. Maybe he eats 20,000 calories per day worth of fruit to get that stick figure? It’s odd and obviously unhealthy. I thought everyone knew that eating mostly fruit is a sure road to an early death. Guess not. As you’d say–“fucking idiots.” Ha ha!

  70. Gabriele on March 1, 2011 at 06:11

    It surprised me too, when i came to this website, the amount of time spent having fun attacking vegans. Because i thought that was only happening on the vegan side. But apparently it happens on both sides. It’s Richard’s website, and he has helped me enormously by posting my email to him a few months ago, which received hundreds of responses which in turn helped me understand this diet and lose weight (finally). So he can do what he wants, he pays for this.

    It just surprised me to see it. When i became a vegan, i just went along my way, like Katie says, and didn’t have a care in the world about the meat-eaters. I couldn’t have cared less. I was too busy living my life and trying to figure out what to eat! Then, when i switched to this lifestyle, i turned my back on the vegan world and didn’t care any more what they said. I don’t hate them. I don’t think they are stupid (well, some of them are). If you are confident in what you’re doing, and you are pretty sure you are right, you don’t need to sink to the level of this clearly uneducated banana eating beach bum. Then again, it is entertaining. :)

  71. Rachel C- on March 1, 2011 at 06:19

    Vegan books and foods should carry a surgeon general’s warning: 2nd generation vegan pregnancy is not possible since the brain requires DHA to grow.
    IMO, that says it all.

  72. EdwinB on March 1, 2011 at 10:39

    I still think there is some sort of mental impairment associated with radical veganism. A marathon runner style body does not suggest health, vibrancy, feminitiy or masuclinity (depending on sex). The physical ideal there is very close to a POW or concentration camp survivor. Their examples of vegan bodybuilders are literally a dime a dozen from young men training for about a 1 year consistently and eating a high calorie diet.

  73. Paul C on March 1, 2011 at 14:19

    Why do I have the urge to go to the 30banansaday forum every time the word vegan is mentioned. Then I see depressing things like a 5′ 4″ 104lb woman newbie vegan contemplating a 7 to 30 day water fast: “Maybe just a tiny sacrifice to pay for all the things I expect it’ll improve though (acne, constipation, gas, some fatigue despite much extra sleep, sporadic body rashes, very bloated tummy, heavy metal detox, other detox/healing)”

    The same symptom list that mysteriously disappears for many going meat-based primal, what a strange coincidence.

    • Sandy on March 1, 2011 at 14:27

      No shit . . . literally. Constipation, gas, fatigue and bloating are all symptoms of fructose malabsorption. And acne has been shown time and again to respond to a low carb diet. Many people do actually respond to fasting due to starving the bacteria, but the problem is that once you start eating again you soon end up with the same problems. Symptoms are caused by gut flora being out of whack and throwing more sugar at the problem will only make it worse. Meat, eggs and fats are what help.

    • Sue on March 1, 2011 at 17:29

      I’ve read the insane posts over there and wish I could comment but if they allowed that the inmates would start spilling their guts. At the moment they keep things to themselves so they don’t get banned.

  74. Jorge from Venezuela on March 2, 2011 at 08:40

    Hey everybody check this out. At Mark’s forum AnneArchy just posted this comparison

    MDA before and after Pics:

    Vs. 30BDay before and after Pics:

    This comparison is priceless, certainly One Picture is Worth Ten Thousand Words
    And those are real results with real people, not just hand picked material. I went througth all pics from 30BDay forum and they look like walking skeletons, also funny they have few pics.
    While MDA pics have lots of pics and great results with healthy people.
    Also funny how that Durian guy talks and he have a weak body! he or she look like a pre-teen girl and that is sad for a ??¿Man?¿¿ Why Durian don’t walk the talk??
    Durian big LIAR go Fuck yourself!

  75. Swede on March 2, 2011 at 17:25

    30 bananas a day, 80/10/10 or low fat raw vegan is actually Paleo to the extreme. Paleos are looking back to what early man ate, while the vegans are going back even further in the evolutionary path all the way back to primates! Takin’ it the the extreme brah!

    Next they’ll move on to a complete plankton diet.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 2, 2011 at 18:27

      Perhaps evolutionary backtracking in the extreme, not paleo. No time to look it up but I’m sure the paleo era started sooner than 16 m yrs ago when we diverged from primates.

  76. VEGANs Are Destroying Our Earth on March 3, 2011 at 14:38

    […] a week back, Richard over at Free the Animal posted a response to a stupid video. I also posted a response about it. You would not believe the amount of comments […]

  77. […] resist a retort? If you’ve watched at the video, follow it up reading Richard Nikoley’s “Vegan Lies and their Stick Figure People” and from Sean Croxton, Underground Wellness“When Vegans […]

  78. Dimitris on March 4, 2011 at 23:37

    Omg, they really hate being human……..
    Less sex drive is a good thing……… Bhahahahahahahahahahhaha!

  79. Dimitris on March 4, 2011 at 23:44

    Sorry for the double post but I can’t help my self. Carefull Durian, you’ ll pop a vein or something, bhahahahahahahahahaha.

    • Andrea on March 5, 2011 at 03:47

      OMG! Sometimes a picture is worth more than 1000 words…………

  80. Dimitris on March 5, 2011 at 01:06

    This is not funny anymore…………

  81. julianne on March 5, 2011 at 01:07

    I did an analysis of Durianrider’s diet just for fun and a blog post about it FYI

  82. Perry on March 5, 2011 at 15:29

    It’s obvious that Harley’s past (drug abuse) has affected his mind. The guy has a few cards missing.

    The only thing that looks healthy on his chipmunk-looking-girlfriend is her breasts — which are silicone. Go figure.

  83. Link Roundup 3/5/2011 « Health Unchained on March 5, 2011 at 17:45

    […] Nikoley takes a run at the 30 Bananas a Day guys Links   links      CrossFit is a Fitness […]

  84. AK CrossFit - Cindy - Benchmark 3/7/2011 » AK Crossfit Blog on March 6, 2011 at 04:36

    […] So one of the Vegan Menace peeps (Durianrider of the 30 Bananas a Day crowd) goes and does just what you’d expect any other people  to do: takes a page from the dying, mainstream media playbook and does a hit piece on various well-known low-carb and Paleo diet advocates. It’s 22 minutes of pretty much pure rubbish. Read more […]

  85. Andrea on March 7, 2011 at 11:05

    8 hours a day on a bike? I’m so jealous that I’m ashamed of myself. I know, too much cardio is bad, but if I had the financial resources to bike 8 hours a day I’d be doing all the rides and bike travel that I’m dying to do!

    • rob on March 8, 2011 at 12:54

      If the dude finds spending 8 hours a day on a bike to be rewarding, then spend 8 hours on the bike.

      “Too much cardio is bad” is one of these things that Paleo people have turned into dogma … how can engaging in an activity that you find rewarding be bad?

  86. el-bo on March 8, 2011 at 06:06

    this article’s hilarious

    what’s this “high-road” you mentioned the other day ?? lolz

    good to see you’re quite at home, havin’ a rumble amongst the dirt and flinging insults at an entire community of people, based on the actions of a few (or one, in this case)

    i’m glad you’ve redressed the ‘not ALL paleos are fat’ balance, by demonstrating that ‘SOME vegans are too skinny’…you look old enough to have realised that ‘not ALL people are ANYTHING’…there are skinny meat-eaters and buff vegans…durianrider, clearly, makes that mistake and you take the ‘high road’ by perpetuating it

    i read, with interest, your posts on denise minger’s blog but, evidently, you aren’t who i thought you were

    • Richard Nikoley on March 8, 2011 at 11:22

      “this article’s hilarious”

      Thousands agree with you.

      “i read, with interest, your posts on denise minger’s blog but, evidently, you aren’t who i thought you were”

      I get that a lot. I’m ferociously unpredictable.

      • el-bo on March 8, 2011 at 11:29


      • Jeanmarie on March 10, 2011 at 22:15

        I’d love to see those posts. Can you send a link to Denise Minger’s blog? I heard her interview on Livin’ La Vida Low Carb awhile back. Thanks!

      • Richard Nikoley on March 11, 2011 at 07:52

        Minger’s blog:

      • Jeanmarie on March 11, 2011 at 20:24


  87. Alex Good on March 9, 2011 at 16:30

    I’d like to see the people who say primates can’t hunt take a punch from a gorilla.

  88. Donna on March 9, 2011 at 22:28

    Well…chimpanzees are homonids. So are gorillas, and orangutans. This should come as no huge surprise…we’ve known for a long time that they were closely related to us. The divergence of these species from our line occurred AFTER the divergence of the hominid line from other primates.

    Chimps are indeed primarily frugivores…so are some species of gorillas. Others, however, are primarily folivores.

    Orangutans are hugely opportunistic–many months, they do eat mainly fruit, and are consider primarily frugivores, but sometimes other foods comprise the majority of their diet, and they eat almost anything–insects, leaves, vines, bark, fungus, anything they can find that’s edible. They’ve been seen eating worms, and fish, too. Orangutans are the most intelligent hominids second to us.

    Bonobos, our closest relatives, eat 57% fruit, with the rest being leaves and shoots, fungi, insects, eggs, and meat. (Once believed not to hunt, we’ve now caught them at it–they hunt and eat other primates, just as chimps do).

    Of course, while meat makes up only a small part of the diet of other hominids, it IS present–they DO all eat meat, and they go WAY out of their way to acquire it.

    All of which means exactly nothing, because the ‘fruitarian’s logic is supremely flawed, due to their profound lack of understanding of the speed of evolution in terms of dietary adaptations.

    You see, Neanderthals were hominids that were even closer to H. sapiens than the bonobo is….and their brains were larger than ours, too, although they weren’t very creative. Thing is, coprolite evidence indicates they ate…meat. Not just some meat, the way we do…they were CARNIVORES. They had the same enzymes that other carnivores do, to maximize the digestion of meat proteins. Ok, they were carnivores the way bears are, rather than the way lions are…they did eat plants (and they cooked them, too)! They were just better at digesting meat than most omnivores are.

    H. sapiens is more closely related to a carnivorous hominid than it is to a frugivorous one. Oops. Fruitarian (and vegetarian) logic FAIL.

    Then there’s the raw food folks. Surely our hominid ancestors weren’t cooking their food, were they? Homo erectus was the first hominid to use fire, and we KNOW that neanderthals were cooking food, because we found it in their teeth. In spite of their close relationship to us, Neanderthals weren’t our direct ancestors…but Homo erectus was.

    So did Homo erectus cook his food? Yes. We’ve found the charred bones (oh yes, he ate meat), and remnants from his cook fires. Homo erectus first evolved 1.8 MILLION years ago. Do you think that’s enough time to learn to digest cooked food and meat? H. erectus was around for a million and a half years. That’s enough time for some pretty profound evolutionary changes, never mind something so simple as more efficient digestion of available food. Raw-Food diet logic FAIL.

    We’re a very young species. Our hominid predecessor, H. erectus, had a good LONG run, and spent it making fires, eating meat, and cooking his food.
    What we most definitely are not well-adapted to is a diet of raw fruits and vegetables, because we evolved from a species that cooked food and ate meat. We evolved to eat cooked veggies, roots, meat, and a little grain, nuts, and seeds. The evidence is all there around the ancient camps of H. erectus. More importantly, it’s there around the ancient camps of H. sapiens, and modern H. sapiens who live the way we know our ancestors did (such as the San and Australian aboriginals).

    However, the Maassai are good evidence that digestive adaptation is actually rapid. They are adapted to a diet of primarily dairy and meat, with some bark. They’re remarkably healthy on that diet. It would probably kill most of us in a year, lol. Many of US can’t even digest milk properly!

    Lesson? There’s no such thing as a single diet that’s perfect and healthy for all humans, because humans spread out across the globe, and then adapted to eat what was available locally. Now we’ve gone and mingled ourselves together and interlaced our genes, and it’s no wonder we’re confused. For any given person…who knows WHAT they should be eating for optimal health. Should they eat like a San bushman, or eat like an Inuit? Like a Maasai, or like a Viking? Or maybe something in between?
    Maybe one day we’ll develop a technology that will allow us to map a person’s genes and the way they are expressed, and spit out an ideal healthy diet composition for them. Until then, we’re stuck muddling along, and eating what appears to make us feel best…at least, that would be the common-sense way to handle it, wouldn’t it?
    Yeah, high-carb diets aren’t necessarily bad for everyone…just for most people. One size never fits all. Somewhere out there is a happy, healthy vegan, and a happy, healthy carnivore (plenty of them in the far North).

    I’ll stick to omnivory, myself…and cook my food. ;)

    • Jeanmarie on March 11, 2011 at 08:43

      This is one of the best explanations of human diets I’ve ever read. Thanks!

    • Jeanmarie on March 11, 2011 at 08:43

      This is one of the best explanations of human diets I’ve ever read. Thanks Donna!

      • Dario on March 11, 2011 at 20:21

        Listen you dumb bitch… shut the fuck up already.. enough with the ra ra!! yay!! bull shit like you are 12. give me a fucking break and shove the xanity bullshit up your ass.

      • Jeanmarie on March 11, 2011 at 20:23

        Somebody’s a little cranky today. Blood sugar crash?

  89. Dario on March 11, 2011 at 22:46

    I don’t believe in “damaged metabolism”. If you ask my mom, she’d tell ya to look at concentration camp victims. Sorry example, i know, but my grandmother lived through it. Don’t ever tell me you can’t lose weight. Maybe not the way you want to but it is utter BULLSHIT that some stupid fat all cannot lose weight. It can be done.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 12, 2011 at 12:27

      “I don’t believe in “damaged metabolism.”

      You might begin by looking up Diabetes Mellitus, both type I and II. And take note that these aren’t simple discrete diagnoses, but exist on a continuum. Somewhere between a perfectly functioning metabolism and T II diabetes is a damaged metabolism.

      • Jorge on March 13, 2011 at 15:32

        I happen to have a damaged metabolism, diagnosed diabetes type I 2+ years ago. Since I eat a primarily meat/nut based diet (almost no vegetables, no fruit, no pasta, no rice, etc…) I don’t have to jab insulin. Sure my sugars are sometimes all over the place, but when I read forums on how the others have the same issues but with insulin jabs, I’m very happy with my results.

        I don’t need to eat a lot to function, once per day (sometimes I even forget to eat), and I look like this Harley Tombstone character. Well I don’t look very healthy, for the moment.

        Now I’ve begun with muscle toning and the stuff growing at alarming rates! Which obviously helps with my f*ck*d up glucose regulation, as toned muscles won’t need insulin to suck the glucose from the bloodstream. The only problem is that I can get as low as 40-50, since the liver is there doing nothing for some hours until it notices that the sugar may be too low… So far it has never gone below 40 or over 250 since I went almost carnivore, which was 4 months after the diagnosis.

        Once on a forum, a vegan d*mbf*ck harassed me because of my diet. This mofo literally ordered me to inject insulin because of the sacrifice I should do for the innocent animals. The forum is located at a site named “The naked scientist”.

        None to say that if I would eat a vegan diet, I would be eating the whole day to get my energy and injecting insulin like there’s no tomorrow. I would have to be on state wellfare, like this Harley Tombstone dude, at least that is what is rumoured on the inet.

        Well, my experience and thoughts about diabetes is that, unless your pancreas has been removed, it is mainly a nervous system issue. The brain giving wrong signals at the wrong times and promoting inflammation due to various molecules (casein or gluten, f.e.) that we ingest.

        Great blog BTW :)

  90. Hungarian Guy on March 12, 2011 at 09:56

    This will be totally off topic but I just LOVE this blog.

    I found it a few months ago while looking at barefoot shoes on the net. Found a video with Richard showing some shoes.

    I am not a 100 percent Paleo but pretty close. I like how most of you here use common sense with respect to eating.

  91. LA on March 21, 2011 at 09:06

    @Rachel C – acquaintance of mine has been long time vegan. I am not. Her and her husband having a baby

  92. […] you got that? Now, here, spot the counterfeit. I've blogged it before, the latest recently, but this is undoubtedly the best context in which to present […]

  93. Good Meat is Dead Meat (Not Meat That Was Never Alive) | AMP3D on April 7, 2011 at 20:11

    […] (Wrong, wrong, wrong. But I digress.) […]

  94. Lyza M. on July 29, 2011 at 12:32

    I am a 21 year old, female vegan, and although slim, am not a stick figure, though I’ve been one in the past and may be in the future, depending on whether I want to be or not. That’s personal choice. I’ve always been around the size that I am at currently–honestly, a couple pounds smaller. But how I feel is what is most important.

    I don’t particularly like Durianriders’ youtube channel. I find it a very poor, immature representation of veganism in general. Occasionally I will watch his videos, which are often melodramatic, for entertainment, but by no means do I find him a credible source of really–anything.

    I thoroughly enjoyed this article. Ironically, when you quoted Anthony Bourdain, you won me over, as I watch that often with my father, despite the heavy influence of meat and meat being a primary aspect of many meals in the show (I love the travel, his witty banter, everything else, and it’s good family bonding with my caterer father :) ).

    Now. I have severe arthritis. There are some things in my diet that I have given up that have helped my flare-ups immensely. I think you know what they are. :) That was high motivation for me. Meat and dairy are inflammatory–go to, this is simple fact, and I have an inflammatory disease. It only makes perfect sense to nix them completely. Fish did help me, I recall, but I chose flaxseed, chia seeds, olive oil, anti-inflammatory vegetables to replace the omega-3s and good, pain-free feeling I had from it. These replacements work just as well or better, and I don’t miss it. I know that others do not have issues in their lives causing them to have such a strong drive to change their diet.

    I believe we do what we can in life…whether you choose health, helping the environment/animals/the world, a combination of both that works best for you, we do what we can and some people value some things more or less than others. I don’t expect everyone to give up their tastes and attachments of meat and dairy to help the planet right now.

    Statements like this with no scientific sources in your article, really don’t dissuade me from my vegan diet. They leave me finding you just as credible as Harley.
    “If they’re claiming they got that way on a pure raw vegan diet, they’re lying. In manny photos, the lean mass pictured is simply impossible on a diet consisting primarily of fruit, as this particular sect of the Vegan Menace advocates. Whether they’re getting the high protein needed for that level of lean mass from various powders or sneaking meat and other animal products when no one is looking I don’t know, but they’re getting it somehow.”

    I’d also like to emphasize that Durian is a fruitarian, not just a simple vegan. There are many kinds of vegans, not just the ones who eat mostly fruit. I don’t feel that was clarified enough–that can be misleading. Beans/whole grains/greens/nuts/seeds–there are other ways to get protein, fat, and carbs that are plant-based and healthy. Many people can find one that suits their body/lifestyle. I am not sure fruitarianism would be for me, but then, I’ve never tried it. Just out of curiosity, have you tried veganism? I don’t know one vegan yet who wasn’t previously meat-eating.

    All and all, it was an informative article though. It’s always good to keep your mind open and hear of opinions from the other side.

    Take care. :)

  95. E. Mike on August 7, 2011 at 18:51

    Lyza, this is the most mature comment I have found on this forum honestly, and I highly respect that you know too that we must not hate each other according to dietary preferences, rather than what kind of person we are.

    We were born with the human frontal lobe to feel empathy, another remarkable adaptation that served us through natural selection as well as the higher ability to problem solve, in order to survive like any other species can during harsh climates as of recently. The answer leaves to our true destiny to know how to THRIVE, after being accustomed to non-vegan exceptions in order to stay alive, which cooking and hunting represents these higher abilities to problem solve, but still having no effect on physiology, which is key in the aid of digestion and assimilation of nutrients.

    And I have to remind EVERYONE, not just paleos and fruitarians, that ignorance indeed is not a substitute for intelligence.

    I am a fruitarian for three years now from a Standard American Diet, reversed my cancer, asthma, depression (brain chemistry is altered by food intake), and arthritis as well. I may as well include that the human body, just like any other species, is reactive for proper homeostasis, and just like any other species, requires one single same diet in order to thrive.

    As for Richard, I would definitly loook forward to read more scientific inquiry for your standing, as I depend solely on facts rather than bias and ad hominem fallacies. I can only accept with an open mind and would love to listen to learn from well informed people. We have to remember our similarities as well, as perspective to dealing with social issues and occurencies that brings up in radical diets compared to one from the average masses.

    Thank you very much for posting Richard and Lyza, and wish you the best for your health.

    • Richard Nikoley on August 7, 2011 at 19:13

      Thank you for your comment E Mike.

      We are all biased. I touched on that in my ahs11 presentation (see latest post). You cannot rid yourself of it, only honestly account for it as best you can and the more you are invested in one thing or the other, the more difficult that is.

  96. Livefree on February 22, 2012 at 08:38

    Wow…a lot of NEGATIVITY her eat this blog. I just stumbled upon it and I will just keep on going. Check your anger?

  97. William Maupin on May 18, 2015 at 04:26

    In 1986, Peter Davies was on holiday in Kenya after graduating from Louisiana State University .

    On a hike through the bush, he came across a young bull elephant standing with one leg raised in the air. The elephant seemed distressed, so Peter approached it very carefully. He got down on one knee, inspected the elephants foot, and found a large piece of wood deeply embedded in it. As carefully and as gently as he could, Peter worked the wood out with his knife, after which the elephant gingerly put down its foot.

    The elephant turned to face the man and with a rather curious look on its face, stared at him for several tense moments. Peter stood frozen, thinking of nothing else but being trampled. Eventually the elephant trumpeted loudly, turned and walked away. Peter never forgot that elephant or the events of that day.

    Twenty years later, Peter was walking through the Chicago Zoo with his teenaged son. As they approached the elephant enclosure, one of the creatures turned and walked over to near where Peter and his son Cameron were standing. The large bull elephant stared at Peter, lifted its front foot off the ground, then put it down. The elephant did that several times then trumpeted loudly, all the while staring at the man.

    Remembering the encounter in 1986, Peter could not help wondering if this was the same elephant. Peter summoned up his courage, climbed over the railing and made his way into the enclosure. He walked right up to the elephant and stared back in wonder.

    The elephant trumpeted again, wrapped its trunk around one of Peter legs and slammed him against the railing, killing him instantly.

    Probably wasn’t the same fucking elephant.

    This is for everyone who sends me those heart-warming bullshit stories.

  98. Arthur Benjamin Hawkins-Castro on June 28, 2015 at 09:13

    Vegan here, and would like to point out that not everyone flocks to the same conclusions that influence our choice on diet. Personally, the fact that meat production, on any scale, is not sustainable for a global population of 7+ billion (and rapidly growing), sways my choice. My second reason would be it’s environmental impact; e.g. the amount of water it takes to cultivate vegetables vs meat, the amount of greenhouse gases created via deforestation, cattle grazing, species depletion and the like. Third if you can be a vegan body builder and not have to kill animals, or ruin another country’s economy/ecology, why wouldn’t you want to be vegan? But I suppose a few sublingual drops of b12 makes my diet bullshit, right?

    • Richard Nikoley on June 28, 2015 at 13:10

      Well, it would be difficult for me to advocate for a diet that calls for eating less meat than chimpanzee eat, not to mention the bugs from grooming each other.

      Sorry Arthur, but I have to be harsh. You know, reading your list above reminds me of clicking into a Baptist, fundie born-again forum and seeing people fervently write the same shit I saw 45 years ago in fundie baptist private school to which I was subjected. The shit just never changes. By contrast, you are welcome to review my record on diet going back to 2008, and it will demonstrate a continual evolution, including a much friendlier take on vegetarianism or close to it (basically, The Blue Zones…none vegan, but none carnivorous either).

      So all your list shit has been debunked many times, at least where the shit isn’t so fucking stupid nobody cares to take the time.

      Perhaps the biggest one is the silly notion that grazing ruminants harm the local environment rather than exercise a critical role in keeping it vibrant by various means. Massive concentrated free grazing can actually turn desert into lush places for all sorts of wildlife.

      Moreover, bugs are as yet the untouched massive biomass that’s superfood nutritious and can feed way more than the existing planet. Ever eaten crickets? I have. I like them. Google cricket flour.

      Next, stop being intransigent and religious. Makes you look stupid, especially when sporting 4 names.

  99. Valerie on July 4, 2016 at 06:56

    I am not a vegan. But i got to know a hard-core one very well. She also speaks at schools trying to covert kids. The bottom line is this : man can live on bread alone. There are a small percentage of people that would be very ill if they had no meat products. I know of no ailment where animal by-products are vital to health /survival.
    Their motive is purley moral: We do not have the right to use animals great and small for any purpose. Other animals eat each other -they have no choice. We as humans have the capacity to to choose. (And also have the capacity for infinite love). We can choose not to harm or imprison any inferior being.
    This belief is the core of the movement. When the movement can seem to get you to sign on by tugging at the heart strings that just arent there in the first place. They will clam anything to get you on board – its healthier for your body, it’s better for the environment, etc. All endlessly debatable.
    I still grapple with the morality. I would love to give up eating mammals or theirs by-products. I dont think they should be bred and slaughtered. Or even imprisioned and used for our benefit. You dont have to be as smart as a chimp to have the desire to be free and alive. But i was raise on this stuff and it’s so fucking hard to give up. I love me some pork! – ironically the smartest animal – as smart a a dog. So I absolutely admire the vegan motive. And maybe i will be one day -or at least not eat my fellow mammals. (proably not).

    • Valerie on July 4, 2016 at 07:01

      *When I said the pig is the smartest animal – i mean the smartest of all the animals that i eat.

  100. Los on August 23, 2016 at 18:59

    Humans are smart because we find delicious things to eat that haven’t made us extinct. These new age people are just soft as fuck across the board. Milk is still much tastier than te substitutes. I don’t know if this is true, but sheep are probably around just because someone found out they taste good. What kind of defense mechanism is it to freeze up when you get scared?

    Life is unfair. Believe it. Note I only dislike vegans (or any other group) that thinks they are above everyone else

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.