The Real Health Debate: WouldaCouldaShoulda?

[This is a complete replacement of my previous post announcing the debate, so as to keep the existing comment thread intact.]

So the debate went off last night, on time, and without a hitch. Thanks again to Steve Prussack of Raw Vegan Radio for doing such a masterful job in putting it together and executing flawlessly. Steve was pro throughout, even in the face of a few problems in the preparation phase. In terms of success, well, he had capacity for 1,000 listeners via the phone lines provided and that was "sold out" to capacity. There was unlimited capacity to listen online and I have no idea how many listened that way. So, worth it? On that basis, I’d have to give a thumbs up. Who knows how many vegans and raw vegans heard things they never hear from within their cloistered circles?

For those who did not get a chance to listen live, there is a recording which I understand will be available as early as today, as well as a transcript that will be ready in a few day’s time. You can purchase that as a package here.

The debate was a real debate and my first experience with such a thing. There was a 2-minute introduction for each party to give background about themselves, who they are, etc. Then there were six questions, known only by the moderator, except for the first question that was basically: tell us about your diet and its benefits. Each party had 5 minutes to answer and we alternated who went first for each question. After the 5-minute answers, we each had a 2-minute rebuttal. The final question was couched sort of as a conclusion: anything else you wish to add? That too was followed by 2-minute rebuttals. In total, the debate ran about 90 minutes.

If you think that I might have been at a disadvantage having a raw vegan as a moderator, put it out of your mind. Steve was meticulously objective and I’m sure those who listened would agree that there was no question asked that would have given any inherent advantage to one or the other of us. This whole thing grew out a a recent series of debates called The Great Health Debate with a lot of well knowns in the paleo, WAPF, and vegan communities, but from what I gather, there was a lot of dissatisfaction; that it was really just a recorded phone conversation between the participants, and not a feet-to-the-fire debate. Steve did something about it and intends to carry it forward. So, if you’re interested in supporting that sort of thing, you can do so by purchasing the Mp3 and transcript. And if you’re wondering, I absolutely trust raw vegan Steve to carry it forward with the same level of professional objectivity. He understands the absolute essential requirement for transparency.

You want to know how I think it went. Well, judging by the comments already in place below that began popping up during and after the debate, it was a resounding success for me. Oh, there was this one comment, which reads, in part:

You made the whole paleo community look bad.

What, again!?

He or she — I don’t know because it’s an anonymous comment and not anything like putting yourself out there live in front of 1,000+ people in a debate — thinks I ought to leave this to the real experts like my friend Mark Sisson, or Loren Cordain, going forward, to which I say: gladly!

In terms of approach, that was a tough one. It was about a month ago that Harley issued the challenge, so during most of that time I collected dozens upon dozens of references, the usual stuff. Then in the run up, I began constructing a complex topical bibliography and notes, numbered, so that I could simply reference the number, giving a link during the debate and publishing the page immediately after. All neat and tidy. Well, "the best laid plans…," so they say. I began to question this strategy in the last couple of days and ended up dumping it completely. I decided that instead of quoting references, dropping names and so on that I would simply approach things as generally as possible, paint veganism as somewhat of a religious-like cult, and contrast "Paleo" as open-ended, flexible, inclusive, guilt shattering.

About four hours before the debate I had a nice long phone conversation with my good friend and intellectual soul-mate, Dr. kurt harris at Archevore, and it became increasingly clear that my newer strategy was essential. "STOP READING THE REFERENCES, NOW!" Kurt told me. I complied.

So basically, it ended up me being the inclusive generalist, and Harley using every version of the tired apple and rabbit in a baby’s crib bromide he could come up with. Oh, and saturated fat and cholesterol clog your arteries; and we’re all such nice [fat] guys and he really hopes we don’t keel over with a heart attack or succumb to cancer. And did he mention? He rides a bike. A lot. Apparently, he’s date-smoothie drinking buddies with Lance Armstrong. [After the debate, Harley posted in comments below that he drank a 3,000 calorie date smoothie during the debate. I, on the other hand, ate my first meal around noon, a big ribeye and raw vegan salad. I wasn’t even very hungry when I finally accepted my wife’s invitation to dinner around 8:30pm. He had more calories by far, I had more nutrition, by far.]

Once I get the transcript, I will tear Harley apart as I do best, in writing. It will be the death of a thousand cuts. In the meantime, here’s my opening and closing from the debate:


My diet is omnivorous and here’s why: because human animals are omnivores. This is a simple fact accepted by the vast majority of biologists and anthropologists worldwide, and for good reason. The natural selection logic of the evolution of species in the face of geographic and climatological upheaval over millions of years makes it perfectly clear that in order for human animals to have migrated to, inhabited and thrived over all corners of the globe — from equator to arctic circle, and from sea level to elevations in excess of 16,000 ft — it was essential to have evolved the capacity to exploit sources of nutrition in a general manner, from plants and animals alike. I take full advantage of that.

Benefits for me have been the loss of 60 pounds with massive strength increase, normalized blood pressure, off allergy meds, off GERD meds, better sleep, better self esteem, improved blood lipids with HDL that runs in the 120s and triglycerides under 50, and on and on. So why didn’t I try vegan? I’ll tell ya.

A fruit-based, raw vegan diet that excludes all animal nutrition is only theoretically possible in narrow, niche environments such as a rain forrest. I say "theoretical" because even supposed primate herbivores are importantly omnivorous, from bug, worm, grub and termite eating to actual predation and eating of other primates. So, veganism in general and raw veganism in particular, is a recent human phenomenon that constitutes a mass nutritional experiment with basis more in ideology, feeling, and myth, modern production, and delivery to market than in biology, physiology and nutrition.

It’s important to draw a clear distinction: vegetarians traditionally consume nutritionally dense animal nutrition. Vegans do not. Nutritionally, this makes a world of difference. A vegetarian society such as India, for example, has thrived for millennia whereas, there is and has never been any such thing as a vegan society. So you’ve embarked on a massive experiment and mostly what you have to look for is pictures on the internet — and don’t forget to but the book. So where is your long term successful experiment to point to? You don’t have one. You’re experimenting with your life in a hugely profound degree far removed from tweaking a variable or two. Rather than eliminate the most egregious neolithic agents like wheat, sugar and high-omega-6 industrial oils, you eliminate everything going back more than 4 million years.

Worse, you subject your unborn fetuses, developing babies and children to your precarious and I would say, precocious self-experiment.

What I’m getting to is that veganism in general strikes of religion. Most specifically, the mode of reason and argument is that of creationists. As someone brought up in a fundamental Baptist, "born-again" home and having attended private indoctrination at both the high school and college level, I retain a keen perspective on the power of guilt & shame, the promise of redemption, and the key to it all: the terrestrial motivation of social separation as both a tool of control and a source of feeling superior.

Vegans begin, as do many Western religions at base, with their own version of the doctrine of Original Sin. You’re guilty by nature. You love the taste & smell of grilling animal flesh. You sinner. But unlike a celestial fantasy that doesn’t play out until your life on Earth is over and the full context of your life is weighed for the balance of your deeds, good & evil, you do have a chance to make amends now. How? Well, we’re back to the catechism. You sacrifice your desires of the flesh in favor of "higher ideals" — as if there was anything higher than to live the life of a human animal on Earth as nature has suited.


You’ve heard here tonight from two proponents of health and fitness. But don’t think or assume that what you’ve heard was from two dietary extremes. Because you have not. You have heard from one far-reaching extreme that goes so far in its restrictions as to eliminate nutritionally dense foods that even primates in the jungle eat as we sit here.

In stark contrast, what you have heard from me is that it’s far simpler than that, far less restrictive than that, does not require any counting or macro-nutrient apportioning, and is flexible enough to allow you to eat what you desire amongst a vast array of cooked foods and raw foods, from nutritionally dense animal sources to fiber rich plant sources. Allow me to reiterate: "Paleo" is not really a diet. Rather, it is a framework within which any individual determines their own lifelong, sustainable regime.

In answer to my first question I used the phrase "from equator to arctic circle, and from sea level to elevations in excess of 16,000 ft" to describe the human experience in the context of migration. And this is a good way to think of the paleo framework. Or, in terms of primitive humans at dietary extremes, from Kitavan to Inuit and everything in between. Now, you see, Kitavans eat about 70% of energy as carbohydrate primarily in the form of starchy tuber while the Inuit have a very low carbohydrate intake and only in the spring and summer. On average, they are 70% or more from animal fat.

And allowing for each to escape the harshness of childbirth and growing up in the hostile, unprotected wild, both reach advanced age in excellent health presenting with none of the diseases of civilization such as diabetes, heart disease, cancer, autoimmune and others.

And in between, there are numerous examples of primitive people who have been studied who equally enjoy good health. Their diets vary dramatically, but they all include animal products.

What’s ideal? Who’s to say? Your only task is to find what’s ideal for you and the options are open-ended.

I agreed to this debate not to convince Harley Johnstone of anything, but primarily to speak to those vegans out there who may not be convinced that what they are doing is ideal for themselves, long term. I’m here to tell you that you should not let anyone shame you, or make you feel guilty for your own desires as a human animal. I’m here to set you free, should you desire it.

The choice is yours: live a life of restriction, denial, hunger and potentially far more serious long term problems everyone knows about so I’ll not review, or live with open-ended possibilities to discover your own diet for life within the framework of a real-food paradigm, only with ALL real foods available.


Finally, the folks from 30bananasaday are perfectly welcome to come and engage here, as a few brave souls have already in comments below. I promise on my own account to treat you with relatively the same respect and decorum you show me (but I don’t moderate and can’t speak for other commenters). Tit for tat. It’s open. There’s nothing to hide here, shield my readers from, or anything of the sort. Apparently, there’s a thread going on over there about the debate (Harley only announced the debate to the 30bad crowd in the last day) but of course, that’s not an open debate since you have to adhere to strict guidelines to even be a member. Dissent is not tolerated. What I find interesting is that in perusing those forums now and then, there are some obviously smart and talented people over there. Apart from questioning their dietary wisdom, I have to wonder how a science minded, smart person would ever be a part of a moderated group of separatists.

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. durianrider on April 13, 2011 at 01:23

    Is Robb Wolf’s diet killing him slowly?

    • TJ on April 13, 2011 at 08:45

      Lance Armstrong is not a vegan, yet he is a much better athlete than you (actually, it seems like he barely tolerates you on the video you push to try to give the impression you guys are “mates”).

      How do you explain that?

      • Josh on April 14, 2011 at 07:46

        Good call TJ. Basically, if you can’t keep pace with Lance Armstrong, you aren’t in good enough shape.

      • durianrider on April 14, 2011 at 21:33

        I wanted to say hi to Lance before he goes to jail next year. I like Lance for what he has done for cycling. I hope they take it easy on him when he goes to trial soon.

        Lance is pretty down to earth for the celeb he is. Least I know I can keep up with Lance after 5hours. ;)

      • Spanky_McMcMc on April 15, 2011 at 05:38

        I just got off the phone with Lance. I tried to pass on your ‘Hi’ but all he said was ‘Durian Who?’

    • Richard Nikoley on April 13, 2011 at 09:32

      It is worthy of note that Harley feels free to drop his links here, while at those very same posts, readers of this blog are generally highly moderated. Yea, a few innocuous comments have made it through, to lend the appearance of some objectivity, but the hardest hitting ones have not made it through, and I know of at least three, including a comment by Robb Wolf himself, yesterday, on the first of Harley’s posts.

      Draw your own conclusions.

      • alhaddadin on April 14, 2011 at 16:02

        I am. The better part of valor is still discretion.

        Just like the better part of the human diet is still meat :)

        (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)

    • Jared on April 14, 2011 at 21:15

      Are you too much of a mental midget to be aware that you’re a mental midget?

      Or are you incredibly intelligent and that’s why you’re so good at playing the part of a mental midget who can fool himself about something so incredible day-in, day-out?

  2. » My Reply to Durianrider engrevo on April 12, 2011 at 15:05

    […] looking forward to the great debate! Go get ‘em […]

    • durianrider on April 14, 2011 at 21:55

      Here is our camps opinion of how the debate went. ;)

      • Richard Nikoley on April 14, 2011 at 22:15

        As if there would be any surprise. I told my wife after, immediately. Vegans are going to say, what the fuck is he talking about. Paleos are going to say, what the fuck is he talking about.

        The only question is, what are the other 900 people thinking, those not saying anything? And that we’ll probably never know.

      • A on April 14, 2011 at 23:41

        After now experiencing almost both sides, here’s a good review – you both did pretty well. Both of you had very good moments, and both had very bad moments.

        Richard, you totally “raged out” a few times getting all angry going on about what you *thought* was correct. Why where you getting so angry about vegans?

        Harley showed immaturity in that he would drop in little “jabs” at others in the health industry wherever he could.

        Next, you are correct Richard, the paleo people where probably like “wtf is this vegan talking about”, and the vegans where like “wtf is this meat eater talking about?”

        However, BOTH of you missed some very important points in the debate.

        First, Richard you where speaking about the MAJORITY of vegans/vegetarians out there – you see, most vegans/vegetarians eat VERY HIGH AMOUNTS OF FAT. There is a reason that what Harley practices is called “low fat raw vegan” – because you ingest low amounts of fat. – That’s another point you seemed to miss, it’s about ingesting low amounts of fat – not that bacteria in the intestines converts some of the fiber to short chain fatty acids. Guess what, that’s the body doing what it’s supposed to do.

        Harley seemed to mostly gloss over the fact that Richard is coming from the “Paleo” point of view, and NOT the SAD (Standard American Diet) point of view. He didn’t really make enough of a distinction between Paleo and SAD. (yes, a bit with the high fat part, but didn’t make it paleo-specific enough)

        I honestly think that both ways CAN have their merits, and obviously, it’s just a personal choice. One thing that both of these ways of eating do is cut out the processed food crap. That right there is huge! If you do that, and eat more “natural” (whatever YOUR definition of natural is) you’ll certainly be a lot healthier!

        Oh yeah, and one more thing, B12 deficiency is real – IN MEAT EATERS TOO! Our food/bodies have changed over the last 10,000 or so years, because of this supplementing b12 is a good idea for EVERYONE. Get a real test that measures real b12 levels in your body – methylmalonic acid (MMA) test. Richard, you said that people weren’t “deficient” but in the “low” range – that IS NOT good enough. Being on the “low” scale of b12 is NOT good for you, the same as being on the “low” scale of Vitamin D isn’t either.

      • Melissa McEwen on April 15, 2011 at 12:00

        LOL find me an example of an omnivore who does not have a bowel disorder who is B12 deficient please.

      • Erin on April 16, 2011 at 14:47

        Excellent point, Melissa! Omnivores who are B12 deficient are either living on Cheetos, are elderly (with both low nutrient intake and low HCl levels) or have a gut or autoimmune disorder.

      • A on April 16, 2011 at 19:28

        An example? Sure – me.

        The last time I was “paleo” was about 3 years ago, and then slipped off into just regular standard american diet eating/living. Got my b12 tested with a MMA test – 185. As I stated, being on the “low” range is NOT good enough.

        No, no bowel disorder, no gut/autoimmune disorder – not eating terribly bad, just standard american diet.

        Again, I state that b12 deficiency is a REAL potential for anyone – not just vegetarians.

      • Fred Butters on April 16, 2011 at 10:56

        Speaking of B12 deficiency, Harley took a test awhile back and it didn’t go so well:

        “Harley’s B12 was just 78. That’s drastically lower than the normal intake range from 145 to 637 and means our vegan could be susceptible to anaemia, blurry vision and loss of feeling in the hands and feet in the long term.”

      • Terry on April 16, 2011 at 19:13

        That was from 2007.

        FOUR YEARS AGO. After that is when he started supplementing b12. Great way to pull up irrelevant data.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 17, 2011 at 11:19

        “Richard, why do you get so offended, defensive, and mad about all this?”

        For sport. Comments at FTA are the Paleo Pub, if you haven’t heard.

        “That’s where b12 comes from – bacteria. So we USED to be able to get that naturally from organic fruits and vegetables, AND our bodies used to have bacteria that produced it in our bodies digestive systems.”

        Like all veg*ns, you have been hoodwinked on this issue. Here, read how I schooled Dr. Searle who, initially deleted comments on his blog and then retracted and admitted I was right.

        And, primates have no trouble with B12:

        “Taking Vitamin D is good as well, and do you know WHY? ”

        Uh, yea, I think so:

        I have no need of B12, but in addition to D I take a bit of fish oil some days, not on days I’m eating fish. I take vitamin K2, the MK-4 subform and here’s why:

        And I take some magnesium because I think it’s super essential and is way too depleated in the soil. And that covers it. Haven’t had a whey protein shake in months.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 22:40

        So Terry, how often do you suck Harley’s cock?

        Just wondering.

      • Terry on April 16, 2011 at 22:46

        Pff. He put a link, I looked at the date it was posted – 2007. It’s as clear as day. You can’t use outdated BS for your argument. Your rebuttal makes you look as immature as Harley was during the debate ragging on other health gurus – you’ve evened up the field.

        It’s your site, whatever. Paleo peeps will never understand low fat raw vegan, and vegans will never care to try to understand paleo’s because of the animal issues.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 23:05

        Oh, you mean Harley has been supplementing for a whole four years on the perfect human diet, all the while spouting off about other people using any supplements, or having a damn cup of coffee, or enjoying a wine or scotch?

        Just keep on stroking it, Terry

      • Richard Nikoley on April 17, 2011 at 13:09


        Oh yeah, if you care to devote a little time – watch this youtube presentation.

        Skip ahead to 1 minute 45 seconds when he starts talking, and give him 5 minutes. Please just watch that, if you don’t want to continue watching after that, feel free to turn it off.”

        I mean just right off the bat I dismiss him totally. Religions not only mandate eating animals, there is a very long Old Testament mandate to sacrifice them.

        Rights simply do not apply to anything but the human animal — not because we have the capacity to suffer, but because we have the capacity to think and that we much choose to act for our values (and can choose not to, implying a natural choice, implying a natural right to make that choice.


        How do the animal “rights” advocates try to justify their position? As someone who has debated them for years on college campuses and in the media, I know firsthand that the whole movement is based on a single—invalid—syllogism, namely: men feel pain and have rights; animals feel pain; therefore, animals have rights. This argument is entirely specious, because man’s rights do not depend on his ability to feel pain; they depend on his ability to think.

        Rights are ethical principles applicable only to beings capable of reason and choice. There is only one fundamental right: a man’s right to his own life. To live successfully, man must use his rational faculty—which is exercised by choice. The choice to think can be negated only by the use of physical force. To survive and prosper, men must be free from the initiation of force by other men—free to use their own minds to guide their choices and actions. Rights protect men against the use of force by other men.

        None of this is relevant to animals. Animals do not survive by rational thought (nor by sign languages allegedly taught to them by psychologists). They survive through inborn reflexes and sensory-perceptual association. They cannot reason. They cannot learn a code of ethics. A lion is not immoral for eating a zebra (or even for attacking a man). Predation is their natural and only means of survival; they do not have the capacity to learn any other.

        Only man has the power to deal with other members of his own species by voluntary means: rational persuasion and a code of morality rather than physical force. To claim that man’s use of animals is immoral is to claim that we have no right to our own lives and that we must sacrifice our welfare for the sake of creatures who cannot think or grasp the concept of morality. It is to elevate amoral animals to a moral level higher than ourselves—a flagrant contradiction. Of course, it is proper not to cause animals gratuitous suffering. But this is not the same as inventing a bill of rights for them—at our expense.

      • Terry on April 17, 2011 at 01:37

        Richard, why do you get so offended, defensive, and mad about all this?

        If you’re wondering, I’ll say it: Harley is pretty bat-shit crazy. Yeah, he is.

        At least, that’s mostly what I’ve gotten from seeing his videos and reading his writings. You absolutely can’t deny the fact that he’s pretty passionate about what he believes in though. He just lacks a certain maturity (that YOU are also displaying a lack of through your comments) and a certain finesse about how to communicate his beliefs.

        Richard, it’s about health first and foremost man. (alcohol is NOT healthy for you – it’s a poison, that’s why you get “drunk” – don’t give me any ride wine “resveratol” bullshit either – eat some fucking red grapes)

        He takes b12 because humans USED to be able to get b12 naturally from organic fruits and vegetables – you know, ones that where NOT grown in soil that had been treated with chemical pesticides that destroy the bacteria that produce b12. Oh, yeah, you DID know that, right? That’s where b12 comes from – bacteria. So we USED to be able to get that naturally from organic fruits and vegetables, AND our bodies used to have bacteria that produced it in our bodies digestive systems. Abuse of anti-biotics and all the other chemical “wonders” of modern living have changed that, and THAT is why supplementation of b12 is good for EVERYONE, REGARDLESS OF WHAT KIND OF DIET THEY EAT. I’m sorry for the caps – but how else can I get my point across?

        Taking Vitamin D is good as well, and do you know WHY? Because of the point that you brought up so many times in your side of the argument – that humans have spread to all the reaches of the globe and “inhabit” places they normally wouldn’t. Vitamin D is produced in your skin when sunlight hits it – BUT it depends on what latitude you are at on the planet – obviously the equator, and near it, the angle is correct for your skin to produce vitamin D for MANY of the daylight hours. As you move away from the equator, the angle is wrong and therefore you get less time that you can make vitamin D. Now factor in the fact that most people wear clothes – covering their skin from those rays, IF THEY EVEN GO OUTSIDE AT ALL during the mid-afternoon hours (locked away in jobs inside buildings) and you’ve got a very good reason to include a vitamin D supplement if you are on the low side. (remember, being on the low side IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH for optimum health – that’s what we’re ALL trying to achieve, is optimum health, right?)

        Look, beyond those 2 things that I think EVERYONE should be taking – if you WANT to take supplements to feel healthy – go for it. I just think most are unnecessary. Does Harley condemn others for taking supplements? As far as I’ve seen, it’s about taking tons and tons of supplements – “superfoods” and such, that a lot of the other so called “health gurus” tell their people they NEED in order to succeed.

        So, in typing this, I can be fair and see it’s a slippery slope – that how can I say that b12 and vitamin D are ok to supplement because our enviornments/foods/lifestyles have changed, but that other supplements are not, so I’ll be fair – what supplements do you take that you feel are necessary, and why? (I mean, what physiological or environmental change have occured that we NEED those things?) I’m open minded to hear it. I’d like to point out, that if you’re going to go straight for “fish oi/omega 3 fatty acids” – if one eats a low fat raw vegan lifestyle – you DO get plenty of omega 3 fatty acids – in the CORRECT ratio to omega 6 fatty acids – almost 1:1

      • Terry on April 17, 2011 at 01:47

        Oh yeah, if you care to devote a little time – watch this youtube presentation.

        Skip ahead to 1 minute 45 seconds when he starts talking, and give him 5 minutes. Please just watch that, if you don’t want to continue watching after that, feel free to turn it off.

        THAT is who I wish was speaking out on the behalf of low fat raw veganism.

        There is some very good material in, and also in the 30 minute follow up Q and A session linked at the end of the video.

        For what it’s worth, yes I’ve sat through and watched the “Sugar: The Bitter Truth” video when a paleo person told me to watch it. (which, the speaker in that video says that fruit is ok – it’s high fructose corn syrup/refined sugars he is speaking out against).

        If you have a video you’d like to make me watch for my having presented this video to you, I will do so if you post it.

      • A Eilola on April 17, 2011 at 02:28

        “if one eats a low fat raw vegan lifestyle – you DO get plenty of omega 3 fatty acids”

        ALA maybe, but not EPA & DHA. And the conversion rate from ALA to EPA sucks. Also, any LA is gonna inhibit the metabolism of long chained omega 3’s. Besides, if one eats LOW fat, how does one get PLENTY of any fats?

      • Alex Thorn on April 17, 2011 at 05:10

        Gary – your ofsky your headsky! I had to switch off after 5 mins when he started talking about slavery and ownership of animals as if this was a uniquely human failing. He should read up a bit on natural animal behaviour – some species of ant make slaves out of other ants.

        Also, all carnivorous animals, in the wild, hunt, kill and eat other animals. Even so-called vegetarian animals eat bugs amongst the leaves and shoots. Just because carnivorous animals don’t use slaughter houses does not mean that they do not inflict terror and physical pain when they kill to eat. Has this Gary ever watched a nature documentary where an animal like a wildebeest is eaten from the inside out while looking – wild-eyed – at his own entrails being consumed? I think, compared to that, being stunned and quickly dispatched in a human slaughter house is much less traumatic!

      • Fartsy on April 17, 2011 at 06:11

        Who says alcohol is bad for you? You? In moderation it is fabulous. And Harley kept ragging on the unnatural act of smoking pot. It is a healing herb that is as natural as you can get.

      • Josh on May 1, 2011 at 06:54

        “Richard, it’s about health first and foremost man. (alcohol is NOT healthy for you – it’s a poison, that’s why you get “drunk” – don’t give me any ride wine “resveratol” bullshit either – eat some fucking red grapes) ”

        If you do some research you will see that across the board, moderate drinkers outlive non-drinkers, and it’s not just red wine. So, alcohol must have some benefits.

      • Josh on May 22, 2011 at 10:54

        A short look at the corresponding Wikipedia article will show you that the whole animal rights movement is not based on a single argument. Also: obviously not all rights are ethical principles, obviously they are not applicable only to beings capable of reason and choice. You do realize that our legal system is not based on Ayn Rands novels?

      • Richard Nikoley on May 22, 2011 at 12:31

        “A short look at the corresponding Wikipedia article will show you that the whole animal rights movement is not based on a single argument.”

        It’s what all the arguments boil down to on essentials: rights to animals.

        “Also: obviously not all rights are ethical principles, obviously they are not applicable only to beings capable of reason and choice. You do realize that our legal system is not based on Ayn Rands novels?”

        All claims to “natural rights,” i.e., not the subject of government edict or law, by definition, rely on ethical principles or, if you prefer, “natural” principles — what is right vs wrong as a function of the nature of a being.

        In terms of a legal system, i.e., “rights” by statute, all that does is either recognize or trample natural rights, and in that context, is largely superfluous or tyrannical. And granting “rights” to some at the expense of the lives, time and money of others by force is just simple robbery.

      • Josh on May 22, 2011 at 18:26

        I didn’t realize you were talking about “natural rights”. I certainly don’t make a claim to them, neither does the leading philosopher on the extreme end of the animal rights movement, Peter Singer. You do not need to concede “natural rights”, or any other rights for that matter, to animals to be convinced that humans should not harm them.

        It is also far less clear what “natural rights” are (or if they exist at all) and whom they should apply to than you seem to think.

        The description of animals in the quoted article sounds as if the author stopped paying attention to the research 15 or 20 years ago. I think you would be hard pressed to find a scientist today that would argue that animals are unable to reason. There is a growing number that argue that animals have ethics, a sense of right and wrong.

        “In terms of a legal system, i.e., “rights” by statute, all that does is either recognize or trample natural rights, and in that context, is largely superfluous or tyrannical. And granting “rights” to some at the expense of the lives, time and money of others by force is just simple robbery.”

        How I wish I was able to say things like this with a straight face, he said mockingly.

      • Richard Nikoley on May 25, 2011 at 15:27

        “I think you would be hard pressed to find a scientist today that would argue that animals are unable to reason.”

        Yea, I’m sure they’ll be coming up with their version of the Magna Carta any day now.

      • David Black on April 15, 2011 at 04:12

        I’m one of the 900, Richard. I’m still digesting the debate, but I have a couple of overall impressions. First, I heard R and H contesting the concept of the “natural” as a basis for following one lifeway or another, and despite the appeals to physiology, science, or whatever it is that humans are hardwired to prefer, I also sensed an aesthetic dimension to the antithetical visions presented, as if a matter of temperament, or even somatotype: ectomorph v. mesomorph. Second, isn’t it astonishing the range of foods on which humans can thrive? From bananas to burgers, our bodies have an astonishing capacity to draw sustenance from all kinds of foodstuffs; as super-omnivores, given the cornucopia of modern agriculture (and adequate income) our choices are limitless. Finally, the common ground seems to be “real food.” Both R and H reject the industrial food-like products so heavily marketed to us, wisely so.

        For a long time I followed a lacto-vegetarian diet, and have also tried a vegan diet as well as a paleo-style diet. Interesting to me that I’ve felt best when living mostly on grains, including staggering quantities of that most dreaded neolithic agent of disease, wheat.

        A note on the Okinawans, Richard. You mentioned them as achieving great longevity while eating lots of pork and lard. The 1949 data used by Willcox et al to estimate the traditional diet shows that 69% of kcals came from one staple–the Okinawan sweet potato, with pork eaten only at monthly festival occasions. In fact, the Okinawans achieved high health on a diet of 85% CHO. Of course now that they’ve strayed from the traditional diet, their longevity is no longer remarkable. (My current diet is heavy in sweet potatoes, which I eat for pleasure more than health).

        Thank you for the debate and for maintaining your provocative blog.

      • MissElmo on April 15, 2011 at 14:01

        I don’t think a report done in 1949 is very reliable. Okinawa was still trying to recover from their land being ravaged by war.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 14:28

        Miss Elmo. Fret not. I’ll get to that sycoduche later.

      • Alex Thorn on April 15, 2011 at 14:42

        Agreed. A lot of crap is written about the Okinawan diet by pro-vegetarian/vegan researchers in the West. If you actually read what native Okinanwans say about their traditional diet (or cultural references in material provided by official sources in the Okinawan Prefecture) you find ‘pork is eaten morning, noon and night’ or similar often quoted, along with ‘they eat everything (of the pig) bar the squeak!

      • Richard Nikoley on April 19, 2011 at 08:03


        Just catching up on some of the older comments. Regarding Okinawans and pork, I don’t think so. Some references here:

      • Richard Nikoley on April 14, 2011 at 23:16

        Oh, and also, since no one here can actually post on 30bad while anyone from 30bad is perfectly welcome to post here with no inner Vatican access security, I’m sure you’ll be pointing all your members here to see the take on this side.

      • Abe on April 15, 2011 at 07:44

        how about some open posting on that site to see the other side of the debate?

      • Paul C on April 15, 2011 at 11:06

        Oops Harley you forgot to censor one post on that 30bad thread, here it is so you can axe it then re-indoctrinate this disciple: “My husband and I listened to the first 15 minutes worth. We both found it painful to listen to. I did not feel that Harvey represented the low fat raw hygiene camp very well. His presentation was not based on science from what we could tell and sounded weak. I felt my time would be better spend else where.”

        That was really the only post that was interesting, except for the one questioning the rabbit & apple quote. You might want to kill that one too.

      • rob on April 15, 2011 at 13:53

        Harley face it: Richard used you like a woman.

      • TJ on April 15, 2011 at 23:02

        No, FreeLee uses him like a woman…

  3. keithallenlaw on April 12, 2011 at 18:26

    Hear hear! I really hope someone plans to archive this, I may not be available at that moment. Cheers!

  4. durianrider on April 13, 2011 at 01:25

    How come 99% of the paleo/primal crew are fatsos?Nice people Im sure but fat all the same.

    • rob on April 13, 2011 at 04:54

      I’m not as lean as I was when I was 30 but I’m doing pretty good for a 48 year old … low body fat is damned hard to maintain when you get old as the hills. Let’s see what some 45-60 year old Vegans can do …

    • TJ on April 13, 2011 at 08:51

      Oh yes, and what’s up with your teeth? I’m afraid to show your videos to my son, as he’ll be up all night with nightmares:

      “The baked- bean-toothed skeleton is after me, dad…”

      (I usually prefer to be more civil, but you’re a rude fuck to the people you attack)

      • durianrider on April 14, 2011 at 21:34

        yeah your right, I need a 30$k smile like Mark Sisson has. ;)

      • Jules on April 15, 2011 at 04:52

        Actually it’s “you’re right.” See Harley, it’s a contraction of “you” and “are,” whereas “your” is possessive, meaning showing ownership. Having command over your native language can be a real boost to your credibility.

      • Gabriele on April 15, 2011 at 07:53

        He can’t spell or speak properly. Nothing new. An education might come in mighty handy instead of these endless bike rides.

      • Lyle on April 16, 2011 at 13:04

        Actually, there’s a comma after an adverb if it starts a sentence. If you want to attack somebody on the merits of their use of the English language, make sure yours is correct first.

        Or better yet, argue the point you’re commenting on instead of the language used to make that point. You might even participate in the debate that way.

      • Gabriele on April 17, 2011 at 06:40

        His obvious and total lack of a general education makes his credibility ZERO. He is passive-aggressive, immature and clearly ignorant. Great role model. Great example. Does this guy even WORK? Who is paying for all his bananas? Is he another raw vegan welfare case?

      • Jules on April 18, 2011 at 05:46

        Come on Lyle, just because I made the honest mistake of omitting a comma doesn’t mean I can’t rag on his continual butchery of the English language; I read a couple posts on his site, and I couldn’t help but notice how poor his writing is compared to pretty much any paleo blog I’ve ever read. I’m really not in the habit of being silly & negative, and calling people out on their grammar and punctuation on blog comments, but this guy really grinds my gears, and he’s easy to pick on. Sorry to have offended you by missing a comma; I’ll always know the difference between “you’re” and “your” though! ;)

      • Jamie on April 16, 2011 at 20:59

        Really struggling to hold back on Australian jokes… (I’m a Kiwi, so I’m allowed – it is written in our law).

      • JohnD on April 16, 2011 at 17:05

        It wouldn’t hurt your case!

      • Ryan on April 18, 2011 at 17:45

        Do you eat a lot of acid fruits, such as oranges, honeybelles, grapefruit, kiwi, cumquats, lemons, or limes? I’ve heard that those types of fruits are bad for your teeth because citric acid erodes tooth enamel. It is a myth though that sweet fruit kills your teeth; even most dentists agree that the sugars in fruits cannot damage your teeth provided you eat the fruit whole (ie, no drinking fruit juice or eating the fruit dried), because the water and fiber naturally present in the fruit act as natural tooth cleansers. As an old saying goes, “When God packaged the poison, he packaged the antidote with it.”

    • Andy on April 13, 2011 at 10:21

      You need to learn how to post a link, unless you want to give us all your blog admin password.

    • Jeff on April 13, 2011 at 10:27

      Just FYI durianrider: you posted a link to you wordpress admin. Probably not what was intended, and not the most convincing argument of your astute reasoning capabilities.

    • Fred B on April 13, 2011 at 12:03

      @durianrider. 99%? If you really want to convince people that eating a Vegan-belief based diet is optimal, you should stop blogging, posting and talking about it. I’d wager almost anyone can see through the mountains of BS including the (Oops!) broken links to mythical doctors claiming eating Paleo will kill you before you reach puberty.

      By the way, I’m 5’8″ and weigh 5Lbs more than you (12% BF) and think I’m a little thin. You should also add “stop posting shirtless pictures of myself” to that list of “how to convince people eating animals is wrong because that’s what I believe.”

    • Alex on April 13, 2011 at 12:30

      Referring to people with perfectly normal and healthy levels of body fat as “fatsos” reflects only your own eating disorder perspective. You may eat a shitload of calories per day, but your mindset is still that of an anorexic.

    • Julie on April 13, 2011 at 16:27

      Perhaps, not being emaciated = fatso.

    • Travis on April 13, 2011 at 19:21

      @durianrider: There’s this thing called muscularity, which you clearly lack. You’re confusing muscle and fat in your extremely demented myopia. Please, eat some animal fats. You need help. Your brain is as shriveled as your body.

    • Tomasz R. on April 14, 2011 at 02:56
    • Jules on April 14, 2011 at 15:35

      Mr. Rider, I’d like to know the source of this data. And good luck with learning the whole “copy/paste” thing. It’s tough, but I’m sure you’ll get the hang of it!

      I don’t know about you guys, but this fatso right here is looking forward to seeing Harley get his ass handed to him. Maybe I’ll eat a juicy ribeye while I listen in! Mmmm…

    • Christ on April 15, 2011 at 04:49

      I’m older than you,stronger than you,bigger/taller than you,more manly than you could ever be and I dont use caffeine,PEDs or have a gut.You are nothing but a troll

      • christina_aurelius on April 15, 2011 at 08:35

        That picture made my morning. Just sayin’.

      • Janey on April 15, 2011 at 13:03

        Oh yeah.

    • John on April 15, 2011 at 05:35

      We’re all fat because a “normal” human is designed for survival in a feast or famine environment. He has to be good at storing energy when it is in surplus. The science of why we store fat is crystal clear: our hormones regulate it, and the prime hormone is insulin. This is not debatable science. Why some gain and others don’t is, and that appears to be insulin resistance (possibly due to other hormones). The worst thing you can do to a “normal” human is feed him raw sugar.

      • Ryan on April 18, 2011 at 17:52

        Agreed with the comment of raw sugar, assuming you’re talking about the refined table sugar you buy in grocery stores. I’ve read a story about crew members of a ship being stranded on a desert island with nothing to eat except the refined sugar they were shipping, and it proved that eating nothing but sugar is worse than eating nothing. The crew members wasted away drinking sugar water, while it is hypothesized that if they just drank plain water, they would have survived long enough to be rescued.

    • Melissa McEwen on April 15, 2011 at 12:02

      Yes we are soooo fat.

      • Fred Butters on April 16, 2011 at 10:25

        Melissa, those people are obviously on HGH and diuretics ;)

      • Arlo on April 16, 2011 at 21:59

        ^^^^- THIS! But sadly due to his overwhelming cognitive dissonance, Harley will find some way to dismiss all these people, probably by spinning his HGH and supplementation conspiracies to radical new heights.

        Also, this is really inspiring. Time for me to start taking this all seriously. Thanks.

    • Alex Thorn on April 15, 2011 at 15:01

      I suppose, to someone who has less meat on him than a butcher’s apron, anyone appears fat!

      And how come you couldn’t catch a kangaroo on a bike? They didn’t appear to be going particularly fast in the video! A typical hopping speed for a kangaroo is about 13-16 mph while a cyclist can comfortably reach speeds of 10-20 mph. A kangaroo can achieve a top speed of up to 44 mph while a ‘reasonably fit’ rider can achieve a speed of 30 mph while the record is just just under 83 mph (set by Sam Whittingham on a Varna recumbent cycle in 2009).

      Aren’t you supposed to be some sort of top-flight cyclist? Or was it just a silly stunt to prove a lame ‘point’?

  5. Sam on April 13, 2011 at 05:40

    Richard, I’m going to interrupt durianrider’s trolling to point you to a terrific new article by Taubes in the NY Times. It’s as great as one might expect; please help get the word out.

  6. noa on April 13, 2011 at 07:10
  7. Josh on April 13, 2011 at 09:55

    Richard hardly looks like a fatso to me…at least not anymore. his weight loss is still in progress also…

    Neither does Robb Wolf.. hell I’ve taken pics where the angle that my shirt is hanging makes it look like I have a massive gut…but I don’t. At least not anymore. I’m still not at six-pack stage but I’m dropping weight. Hardly a “fatso” either by any means.

  8. Josh on April 13, 2011 at 09:56

    I do really hope the debate is an actual debate instead of just poo-flinging….

    • Kent Cowgill on April 13, 2011 at 10:16

      Josh, he’s a fruititarian who has to eat his own weight in bananas every day. Of COURSE there’s going to be poo-flinging.

      • Josh on April 13, 2011 at 10:47

        I try to be civil and really hope Harley the best in his diet and hope he doesn’t end up with fatty liver or some shit like that but I lol’ed at this one.

      • Arlo on April 16, 2011 at 22:06

        And with at least three bowel movements a day, there’s going to be plenty of material to fling.

      • Ryan on April 18, 2011 at 17:56

        I could probably eat my own weight in bananas every day if all means to cook food suddenly disappeared. Living on nothing but sweet fruit sounds like heaven to me, but I still think it’s too good to be true. Maybe if I win the lottery one day, I could experiment with that idea, but until then…

  9. Carly on April 13, 2011 at 10:25

    It’s clear he is looking for more traffic for his website so is posting shit to be controversial. Be gentle with him though, he looks awfully delicate.

  10. Ken on April 13, 2011 at 10:31

    I’m fat, but I am not, nor have I ever been, a crackhead ;)

  11. Robb Wolf on April 13, 2011 at 10:32

    What a complete spineless coward this guy is.

    Instead of creating worthwhile content he trolls for fights. When I do my australian seminar series I really hope we “meet” each other.

    • Ken on April 13, 2011 at 10:49

      5 stars!

    • Sue on April 13, 2011 at 15:50

      I really hope you guys meet and I’m there to see it. Need to find out your seminar series schedule in Australia.

    • Travis on April 13, 2011 at 19:23

      Give him an wedgie for me, Robb. :-)

    • Paul Winter on April 14, 2011 at 02:40

      Hi Robb,
      Are you planning on visiting NZ when you are down-under?


      • julianne on April 15, 2011 at 22:05

        Just answering for Robb here – yes he does plan on visiting NZ. See his latest post. There are a bunch of us Kiwis that have been hassling him!

    • durianrider on April 14, 2011 at 21:39

      Hey Robb, send me a photo from TODAY with the newspaper local to you and I will put it up to be fair. 14TH of April. Have your left hand giving me the finger if you want or a thumbs up.

      Im fair. You game? ;)

      You coming down under? Thats great, we should do a video of who can run faster, longer and who can do more high kicks, push ups or bench press a certain % of their body weight in 10 mins. Id be up for that. High fat vs low fat. You can drink as much coffee or crushed up no doze pills as you like.

      My email is

      • Sue on April 14, 2011 at 22:35

        Why don’t you just publish Rob’s comment on your site.

      • Jared on April 14, 2011 at 22:41

        Seriously. You attack someone personally on your site and then don’t even let them respond in comments? How pathetic is that?

      • Jules on April 15, 2011 at 04:59

        With a NEWSPAPER?! Really?! What’s with all the paranoia? Do you need a copy of Denise Minger’s birth certificate also?

      • Spanky_McMcMc on April 15, 2011 at 05:44

        Thanks Jules . . . he says as he wipes the freshly-spit-out coffee from the monitor screen.

      • Abe on April 15, 2011 at 07:26

        Let’s see your photo with today’s paper, and how about some open comments on your site? If you can’t allow people to respond, don’t come over to this site to troll… very rude.

        I find it funny that durianrider’s defense to everything is to say Paleos are fat. No response to the issues…

        Q: What about health issues related to veganism?
        A: Robb Wolf is fat.

        Q: Any comment on the studies that show reduced brain activity on a veggie based diet?
        A: Gary Taubes is fat.

        Q: Why do you block comments and posts on your sites from struggling vegans?
        A: Mark Sisson is fat.

        Q: What is your comment on the assertion that the vegan diet is not natural, and very young (fad)?
        A: Loren Cordain is fat.

        typical religious fundamentalist….

      • Jan on April 15, 2011 at 11:17

        Harley, even if you could bench press 50% of your own weight, it would be 72.5 pounds. Hell, I’m a 48 year old, menopausal “fatso” and I can bench press almost that much.

      • Lute Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:17

        Geez, I’m a 73 year old and I bench press 135, I used to do 165 before my back surgery, but slowly creeping back up. I enjoyed the debate, with Richard at least having substance to his dabate, while Harley had nothing to offer, period. Of course some would say that I’m biased, cause i’m the dad.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:37

        thanks dad, mom, brothers, sisters, in-laws and of course my wife.

        many listened in. Of course, their opinions are mixed. :) #yearight

      • JohnD on April 16, 2011 at 17:15

        You coming down under? Thats great, we should do a video of who can run faster, longer and who can do more high kicks, push ups or bench press a certain % of their body weight in 10 mins. Id be up for that. High fat vs low fat. You can drink as much coffee or crushed up no doze pills as you like.

        My email is

        Rob please,please oh please do this !!!So we can punk this douchebag out and be done with it already

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 17:38

        JohnD and Robb, it’s a worthy goal and make sure you have video rolling because I promise you I will make my readers bored to shitting promoting it.

        Just don’t expect to much. Harley will either be getting his 12 hours or he’ll be too busy training for elite athleticism. Who knows, he may be off in LA chumming with Lance.

        Be sure to contact his publicist first for his schedule. Wouldn’t want you to wast any time.

      • james on April 17, 2011 at 18:03

        Hey durianrider, even though I could bench you I’m not gonna beat my chest like a paleo gorilla man..

        Why don’t you come to Seattle and see which one of us can dance to drum & bass for 3 hours straight. By the way, I don’t think they’re gonna let you bring a crate of fruit into the club, so you might want to find an energy source that can sustain you for 3 hours rather than make you crash within 1. I’ll probably eat some gluten free pizza before heading off, you can eat whatever you want.

        If that doesn’t grab your attention maybe this will.. I bet I can do the Melbourne shuffle better than you and I’m a Washington-grown diehard American. ;D

      • Liz Downunder on April 17, 2011 at 19:46

        He’s probably never heard of the shuffle. Hey James, your post brought back memories…my husband’s and my first few dates were to drum and bass nights (in Melbourne). I couldn’t shuffle any more unless I had some nice pills first. :)

    • Adrian on April 14, 2011 at 22:38

      You’re doing Aussie seminars? Sweet!

      Any timeframe in mind for your trip?

  12. Tin Tin on April 13, 2011 at 16:58

    Rich, don’t let this guy drag you down to his level. Keep your cool in the debate, mate :) .

    • Richard Nikoley on April 13, 2011 at 19:27

      Tin Tin

      It is hilarious to me how everyone keeps admonishing the same thing. Ha!

      We’ll just have to see how it goes. I’ve guaranteed nothing to anybody.

  13. keithallenlaw on April 13, 2011 at 21:13

    I’m actually really impressed by the riders mental ability to overcome the stress of finding that many calories a day in fruit to survive. Wonder how he travels far beyond his co-op

    A small backpack and I’m good for days in the wild. This nut has to pull a wagon behind his bike just for a one day supply of calories. What kinda freedom is that??? Sad existence!

    • Ryan on April 18, 2011 at 18:04

      That’s the only thing that holds me back from trying the raw vegan diet, simply because of the sheer amount of food I’d have to eat. There are quite a few successful fruitarians though, many of which are endurance athletes. Ever hear of Michael Arnstein? Meat does seem to be the best source of concentrated calories though, I do have to agree with the paleos that meat should be chosen over grains for concentrated calorie sources. Then again, my own basis for that choice just has to do with ease of preparation. For example, you can’t eat pasta plain, you have to take extra time to create the toppings that go on the pasta, usually mixed vegetables and olive oil, or give in and buy premade pasta sauce. Whereas, with meat, all you have to do is just throw it into a skillet on the stove, or alternatively use a crockpot, and you can eat the meat plain.

  14. YattaBell on April 13, 2011 at 22:07

    I just posted this on his blog. I figure “what the F—” Best of luck to you tomorrow.

    YattaBell says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    April 14, 2011 at 5:02 am
    “Im seeing people eating paleo/primal style fad diets losing muscle, gaining LOTS of belly, ass and neck fat, FULL BLOWN DIABETES and even a few heart attacks!”

    Where? Where are you seeing these people? Where are you seeing someone who has done Paleo for committed months with DIABETES?!? Who do you know that does Paleo that has had a heart attack? If these are generalizations, then you are missing a large population of people that have full on REVERSED these and many other autoimmunity and inflammation related problems. They openly post on the internet with pictures of themselves and how they do. I seems rather silly to attack a group of people that eat a certain way and, while they may not have 5% body fat, they’re healthy. Their blood work and cholesterol are in good shape. They have improved their strength and conditioning. And they openly post about it as well. Just like many vegans do as well. Your one sentence that I quote is just full of ignorance. Your generalizations about the Paleo lifestyle are too selective. And, your boastfulness to your diet over others comes off as condescending.

  15. noa on April 13, 2011 at 22:48

    Yattabell. Dont bother. The guy is a notorious liar. He will make up shit as he goes a long. I think he has like 4 former rooms mates by now who were all into ajonus crakpotzi. Who died and worse. All of them. He will tell you that psylocybin is lethal (no known LD50) he will tell you that seretonin production requires carbs, when any muppet could tell you that seretonin is only made from tryphan via 5-hydroxytryptophan decarboxylase Enzymes. The only thing he is honest about from what I can tell is that his name is Harley and that he eats a lot of fruit. everything else that passes that mans lips and hands should be viewed with great caution.

    Have any of you noticed how Harley seems to have a dry mouth in all his later videos. I wonder what could cause a symptom like that with all the water he claims to drink, not to mention the fruit.

    Harley. Are you deliberately hurting people?. That is, being quiet about issues you are having from this most bizzarre diet?. Also, why would you do this to yourself. because you have a crackpot feminist girlfriend with plastic tits you think is worth being ill for?. Mate I live in denmark, by our standards she is kind of pretty in the neighbours daughter kind of way. She wouldnt turn a lot of heads here tho. Well her plastic tits might. but heh….

    • YattaBell on April 14, 2011 at 08:05

      You’re right. I shouldn’t have bothered. Durianrider deleted my post anyway. Shouldn’t let arrogant ignorants get to me (so much easier said than done).

    • durianrider on April 14, 2011 at 21:52

      #1 house mate died in 2009. She was a raw paleo eater and fan of Aajonus Vonderplanitz.

      #Another housemate is currently alive. Great guy. Has had troubles with teeth and low b12. We got his tests back today. B12 still in the ‘low end’.

      #If you want to eat dead animals and drink magic mushrooms, thats your choice but to say its healthy..

      #Yeah Ive got a sports model for a girlfriend. The closest thing you get to plastic is your blow up dole. ;)

      #Feel free to back to sleep when your organic coffee wears off.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 14, 2011 at 22:10

        These must be the most cloistered “paleos” on the face of the planet.

        Harley, if you want some credibility on this point, then either produce them for examination and scrutiny, or link to Internet posts and articles about all the paleo diet problems as anyone can do in a split second as regards vegan.

        Oh, I forgot. There are no vegan problems. They’re not doing it right. Or, they’re not vegan.

      • Arlo on April 16, 2011 at 22:20

        Sounds like the “No True Scotsman (or Christian)” logical fallacy.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 22:54

        Arlo, I think someone in a previous comment said it best: everyone in front of Harley is juicing. Everyone behind him is not vegan.

      • christina_aurelius on April 14, 2011 at 22:28

        I find it terribly irritating that you insult people and their eating choices but try and make it “ok” to say these things by throwing in a “their nice people” or “I’m sure he’s a great guy” within the insulting statement. Don’t fluff your insults with niceties, it’s tacky. If you want to insult or critique someone’s lifestyle or food choices then just DO IT, leave the personality compliments out of it. Also, for the love of multiple gods, Harley, use spell check before you post these things. To Americans, “blow up DOLE” is not the same as “blow up DOLL.” We get what you meant but it certainly doesn’t help your argument for what happens to a brain on 30 bananas as day.

      • Jules on April 15, 2011 at 05:03


      • skib on April 15, 2011 at 05:42

        I find it somehow ironic that a dole bludger can’t spell doll.

      • Gabriele on April 15, 2011 at 10:42

        That is called being passive aggressive. It was so noticeable in last night’s debate. Bicycle boy has negative things to say and then backtracks by saying “but he’s a great guy”. This one is fat, that one is fat, that’s all he ever says. He is fixated on who is fat, oh, but “they are nice people”. All he has going for him is his bike and his bikini clad chick, that’s it. A grasp of grammar or punctuation would be refreshing.

      • colin nelson henley on April 16, 2011 at 07:25

        please don’t refer to him as ‘bicycle boy’. :)
        I’ve been a bike courier since ’92, and have
        no desire to chase ‘roos or destroy my teeth.

      • Erik on April 16, 2011 at 10:49

        Here’s another bicycle lover who thinks harley is full o’ shit.

        The endless waves of short-but-stupidly-steep hills on the rural roads where I’m from would not do Durian’s stick-frame any favors. Bulging quads and glutes are what it takes, and you even need some serious arms to pull down into the handlebars to keep your legs pushing the pedals DOWN instead of pushing your body UP while you’re tearing up that ridiculous 30% grade. I don’t think bananas are gonna cut it. Pass the venison, would you?

      • Christina on April 16, 2011 at 15:27

        Let’s also not forget how amazing bulging quads and glutes look! Pass the beefcakes, please!

      • Dave, RN on April 15, 2011 at 22:26

        I think he ws just confused about “Dole” because it is after all a brand of bannana.

      • Mountain on April 16, 2011 at 12:16

        It’s like how Ricky Bobby always starts off his insults, “With all due respect…”

      • Jared on April 16, 2011 at 12:17

        It’s in the geneva convention! Look it up!

      • Kevin Hughes on April 17, 2011 at 08:52

        HA! I thought he meant a giant inflatable pineapple used to promote the fruitarian lifestyle!

      • Sue on April 14, 2011 at 22:32

        Yeh, you’ve got a sports model for a girlfriend – so what. Didn’t she have anorexia? Only mention that because you were derogatory against Denise Minger saying she was/is anorexic.
        If you could satisfy your girlfriend sexually I suppose she wouldn’t be talking about the idea of multiple partners.

      • christina_aurelius on April 14, 2011 at 22:37

        OH SNAP!!!!!

      • D on April 15, 2011 at 18:03

        I was going to say the same thing. She is an admitted “former” anorexic. He seems to trash anorexics all the time. And having people take your photo for your blog does not make you a model.

        I was pissed at Denise Minger comment… Like shes 20 and a WOMAN! How could she know anything. Tisk tisk…

      • Melissa McEwen on April 15, 2011 at 12:05

        Uh huh, yeah, prove it. Because it seems you make people up just to use in arguments.

      • Michael on April 15, 2011 at 14:19

        I remember once watching a debate that Gary North was involved in. He actually stopped in the middle of the debate, looked over at his opponent, and said in no uncertain terms, “what do you guys do? Make this stuff up as you go along?” Gary was mad but it was actually hilarious.

      • Jamie on April 16, 2011 at 21:19

        Freudian slip (which I suspect is over your head), Harley, mentioning dole instead of doll. As dole (which is a colloquial term for receiving an unemployment benefit from the Government in Australia and New Zealand), is exactly what you are on. This gives you all the time in the world to ride your bike and freeload off your girlfriend and the Australian tax payers. Unlike each and every one of the so-called fatso Paleo people you identify on your blog, who are hard working authors, researchers, business owners, who are to a degree, sacrificing some of their health in order to help educate others. Very difficult I would imagine to stay stick figure thin, as you do Harley, when your job sees you on the road for 6 out of 7 days, for weeks on end, crossing multiple time zones as you go. I’m sure if Richard, or Robb, were lazy enough to collect a dole payment every week and just ride their bike, they too would be soon sporting the stickman body that you do Harley.

        Just one last point of factuality, though we shouldn’t really let the facts stand in the way of cultish beliefs. The vast majority of training that Lance Armstrong would be doing where the public are able to get access to him, would be sub-threshold training, i.e. easy pace. This means that any rider with moderate ability can keep up with him. But when Lance and other pro-riders put the hammer down, I’m sure you would get shelled very quickly. If you didn’t, and you are drug free, then shit dude, get yourself a pro-contract if you are so red hot. The fact that you spend so much time giving yourself a jolly good colonoscopy suggests to me that perhaps you aren’t quite as good as what you would like people to believe. But just keep basking in the reflected glory mate… the logic of “I rode a bike with Lance, therefore raw veganism is the best way to eat” really has me waivering.

      • christina_aurelius on April 17, 2011 at 19:12

        I second this post. Absolutely amazing and “red hot.”

      • Craig on September 17, 2011 at 09:46

        “#Yeah Ive got a sports model for a girlfriend. The closest thing you get to plastic is your blow up dole.”

        Are you proud of that? Paleo women don’t need “plastic”. They have real flesh!

    • Taylor on April 15, 2011 at 08:02

      His girlfriends hot. Not to mention, that’s just a low blow to attack a random girl’s looks. Why don’t you post a pic of your wife Noa?

      • D on April 15, 2011 at 18:21

        Harley attacks people ALL THE TIME FOR THEIR LOOKS. He was hurling out insults right and left about people. He called Sally Fallon a mad cow.

        Yeah, his girlfriend is hot, if you cut off her head. As my grandpa used to say, has a face for radio.

    • Ryan on April 18, 2011 at 18:06

      I wonder about the water – I’ve heard that if you live off of just fruit, you don’t need water, because most fruits contain all the water you need, and then some.

  16. rob on April 14, 2011 at 07:06

    Is Harley using Androgel?

    He has accused others of using HGH, what if he has been supplementing his testosterone with Androgel?

    I hereby challenge him to prove he is NOT using Androgel … put up or shut up Harley .. provide proof or get lost.

    • durianrider on April 14, 2011 at 21:40

      The closest I get to using drugs is racing with those that do. I dont think drug takers are wankers, I just say its an unhealthy choice.

      • rob on April 15, 2011 at 13:56

        Harley you having a little troubling walking today? That was a hell of a beating you took, ugliest thing I’ve ever seen and I’ve been in twelve different prisons ….

      • D on April 15, 2011 at 18:06

        So if you are such an elite athlete, why haven’t you won the Tour de France? How come no one outside your cult has heard of you and your athletic prowess? Christ, you bike 320 miles a day and only eat weeds off the side of the road? You should call the Guiness Book of Records.

      • Peter on January 30, 2012 at 13:13

        Why are there no paleos winning the Tour de France? Why are there no Atkiners winning it either?

      • Richard Nikoley on January 30, 2012 at 18:09

        What’s your confirmation bias point?

    • Spanky_McMcMc on April 15, 2011 at 05:49

      And submit a picture of you holding TODAY’s paper.

      That’ll do.

      • Laurett on April 15, 2011 at 11:33

        ROFL !

  17. Zach on April 14, 2011 at 08:13

    Its worthless to respond to him, let alone ask him questions in hopes that you will get a response. He is the internets biggest troll.

  18. Bob Connors on April 14, 2011 at 08:32

    This guy deserves a beat-down. Let’s be honest here. We’re all excited to hear Richard debate him because we pretty much know what to expect from Richard. The honest, unvarnished truth. And the truth is that Durian is a bat-shit crazy stick person with an eating disorder. Now, that’s all fine and dandy if he would just shut the fuck up and kill himself slowly in the privacy of his own home. Far be it from me to infringe on his right to eat whatever he wants. But he aggressively recruits others to his lifestyle by lying about the “truth” of his diet on his own forums and any others that will allow his spam.

    I’ve got a young daughter and know that many young people are susceptible to lies like this if they’re spoken by dynamic or compelling “gurus” (think Kool-Aid, matching track suits and Nike sneakers.) There’s no doubt that Durian is compelling. He weaves a mighty interesting tale which the vast majority of us healthy, mature folks can see as the bullshit that it is. But what about the more vulnerable amongst us?

    I take comfort in the fact that by the time my daughter is old enough to worry about diet that Durian will likely be a cautionary tale, a name whispered by Vegans to each other over salad recipes and vitamin B-12 shots… maybe another Lierre Keith-like Judas derided by the Vegan community as someone who must not have stuck to the diet/didn’t try hard enough/wasn’t ever really a Vegan.

    So, I for one hope that Richard doesn’t pull any punches.

    • Laurie D. on April 14, 2011 at 16:33

      He pretty much IS killing himself slowly in his own home. That man looks seriously ill and anorexic. If he wasn’t so annoying, I’d feel sorry for him. Imagine thinking Robb Wolf looks like he is dying slowly? I hope I look that good when it is my turn to go! DurianR’s mind is obviously sick as well.

  19. Paul C on April 14, 2011 at 10:44

    What does everyone plan on eating during the debate? I am going to have European red stag ground venison (from a local farm) with broccoli, and as many bananas as I can put down.

    • Sue on April 14, 2011 at 14:38

      It will be breakfast time here in Australia around 8.30am so I’ll just be having a black coffee.

      • durianrider on April 14, 2011 at 21:42

        Id need caffiene to ‘wake up’ if I ate what you guys did. I used to actually. Now Im loving it and loving helping others love it.

      • Sue on April 14, 2011 at 22:25

        I don’t need it to wake up just like it.

      • D on April 15, 2011 at 18:10

        Same. I gave it up for ‘health’ reasons and missed it. Life is too short to deny yourself small pleasures. Even if I eat Paleo most of the time, if the occasion came up, such as being on vacation in Europe, I would eat whatever the hell I felt like. It is all part of the enjoyment of life.

        I can’t imagine going to someplace like Spain and not eating Manchgo Cheese, jamon, crispy bread, wine, coffee….mmm

        What I really can’t imagine is going to someplace like Spain and eating bananas, not enjoying dining out, not sitting for hours at a coffee shop… what a sad vegan life.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 22:14

        Good points, D. When I go to Europe I find it pretty easy to eat mostly paleo, but that’s because other than bread and a few other things it largely is Paleoish. But I’m still also going to dabble in some other other fine foods, prepared with care and pride.

      • Joseph on April 16, 2011 at 15:12

        What’s with all the references to coffee as some kind of Paleo staple? For the record, I have never drunk coffee at all (I have eaten it a few times in ice cream); going “Paleo” did not change that. I still drink no coffee, and I don’t plan to start any time soon. I may just spend my whole life without it.

      • Erin on April 16, 2011 at 15:21

        Harley, you also tell people routinely that they need 10-12 hours of sleep a night… why so much sleep if fruit is so energizing? Is it because those 12 hours are broken up by 8+ trips to the toilet?

      • colin nelson henley on April 17, 2011 at 03:35

        you live on fucking fructose, so I don’t see you occupying any sort of non-stimulant high ground… and it’s spelled ‘caffeine’

    • durianrider on April 14, 2011 at 21:41

      I drank a 3000cals date smoothy during the debate! Honest! lol!

      • Richard Nikoley on April 14, 2011 at 22:03

        I had a huge grilled ribeye for lunch and a bit of raw vegan salad. That was 6 hours before the debate and it took until 8:30 pm before I begrudgingly accepted my wife’s invitation for dinner. Albondegas, 3 meatballs, with some garbanzo beans and a spot of sour cream. I’ll be good to go until at least noon tomorrow.

        Nothing like high density nutrition, which only protein and fat can do.

      • jose marti on April 16, 2011 at 13:10

        Oh yes. Albondigas with green plantains or yuca fried with manteca. Also great is to use the fat of the albondigas stew to pour over other meats. And the slices of avocato.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 14, 2011 at 22:05

        Ooops, when I say ‘for lunch’ that might imply breakfast. I almost never eat breakfast. Only when I’m hungry, which is less than once a week.

      • Ryan on April 18, 2011 at 18:12

        Damn Richard, how much meat do you eat at your meals? I wonder if it’s healthier to eat two huge meals with 1200+ calories each, or graze eight times a day at 300+ calories each? Though, I suppose if your body is in a constant state of ketosis, you probably metabolize fat at a much greater rate than the supposed average of 300 Kcal/hr.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 18, 2011 at 20:14


        It all just depends. We just got done with dinner. It was a salad with tuna.

        Other times, I might eat 2, 3 pounds of meat. Tonight, I was neigher very ravenous, nor hungry. But who knows what tomorrow may bring.

        I employ a radical mechanism: I eat when I’m hungry. Chances are, that won’t happen until noon or sometime after, tomorrow.

        This has been a long process, but I have finally found myself in a position where I can just pretty much trust my hunger going forward.

      • Abe on April 15, 2011 at 07:38

        my toddler just bit the nose off a goat at the petting zoo, so I guess we’re having meat for dinner.. or at least goat’s nose.

      • Travis on April 15, 2011 at 13:15

        My 1-year-old prefers steak when it’s on the table over whatever else is on the table. Good lord, we’re raising little beasts, aren’t we! :-)

      • Abe on April 15, 2011 at 14:47

        yes, we are. we raise our meat here, mostly rabbits, pigs, goats, chickens, and some beef every once in a while. My toddler helps me with everything, including feeding, watering, butchering, processing, and shoveling manure.

        He’s only 3, but he could totally kick durianrider’s ass any day of he week… and then eat his liver…

      • Carly on April 16, 2011 at 01:07

        Ooh nasty, you don’t want to eat that streaky piece of piss’s liver. Fatty liver disease guranteed!

      • Travis on April 16, 2011 at 16:50

        That’s great that you raise own meat and that you’re getting them involved early. My 5 year old wants to go fishing with me this year, so she’s going to learn all about what it means to catch something and eat it. Just bookmarked your web site for future reading.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 17:06

        Man, Travis, I think I recall my early 4-5 yr old memories of fishing with dad and grandpa in the Trukkee river more than anything that early. Then it was Pyramid lake (Google, if you don’t know),” which the Trukkee dumps into from Tahoe. (who doesn’t know that one?) There, we would take browns and rainbows, but only 18″ and over — so we used flies we tied ourselves (me too, from a young age) , not bait. So several pounds was commonplace.

        A bit later we began taking yearly trips in August to the Klamath river to catch the steal head runs. Pound for pound, the best fighters.

        We broiled, we baked, we fried, and what was left over got smoked.

      • Abe on April 16, 2011 at 17:51

        yeah, you’re right, but I’m allowed to cheat every now and then…. :)

    • Lute Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:28

      I had half a banana along with Primal Fuel and a raw egg. Does that count for 30 banana’s?

  20. J. Stanton - on April 14, 2011 at 13:05

    I expect this will be like debating Duane Gish or any other “creation scientist”.

    Their tactic is to spew incredible quantities of lies and bullshit in a confident tone of voice: so much that you couldn’t debunk it in six hours. Then you spend all your time on the defensive. To the uninformed, they appear to have “won” the debate, because they look calm and confident while you look defensive and flustered.

    It’s important to state your case first and then go back and address some of the howlers — unless you’ve got a quick zinger of a rebuttal to start with (which is always best) before transitioning back into your own case.


    • Alex on April 15, 2011 at 04:06

      Considering that Harley runs a tightly controlled online cult and cultivates his public persona by posting trollish inflammatory comments and videos, a better analogy is that it’s like debating Fred Phelps of GodHatesFags, who’s also a cult leader and attention-whoring troll.

  21. Nadia on April 14, 2011 at 18:12

    None of the links to sign up to listen on the realhealthdebate website are working for me. Is anyone else having this issue? I have tried multiple times on two different browsers and I really wanted to hear this. :(

    • Jen on April 14, 2011 at 18:16

      Same here, no luck with any of the links. Any folks able to access?

  22. jordan on April 14, 2011 at 18:13

    imagine smearing a chicken breast on your partner’s back…that’s what makes it bad food!

    keep it fun!

    • Sue on April 14, 2011 at 19:36

      What makes a food healthy and nutritious? If you can smear it on your body and it tastes good. If you don’t have the desire to eat a chicken or a goat at a petting zoo then that can’t be your natural diet!

      • Sue on April 14, 2011 at 19:38

        Durian said quite a lot of idiotic things.

      • Josh on April 15, 2011 at 04:23

        But what if I DO have a desire to eat critters at the zoo?

      • Abe on April 15, 2011 at 07:41

        to be honest, I can’t even look at a pig without wondering how good the smoked ribs or roasted hams would taste like….

    • christina_aurelius on April 14, 2011 at 22:59

      His logic is…asinine. Just because I don’t want to smear chicken on my back doesn’t mean I don’t want to cook it and put it in my mouth. I don’t exactly want to smear carrots, onions, lettuce or olives on my body but I still want to eat all those things. As far as the petting zoo goes, he’s right. I don’t go to the petting zoo and have to control my child from attacking goats and chickens. Where the hell am I raising my kid? Australia? But, I digress. My child may not be begging me for warm pieces of raw meat but there are plenty of cultures where young children consume RAW meat and blood with excitement! Just watch episodes of Anthony Bourdain’s “No Reservations” and see his interactions with contemporary hunter-gatherer societies in Africa. PLENTY of meat eating going on by children, including the eager drinking of fresh, curdled cow’s blood. I’m not saying this is what I serve my son as an afternoon snack, however, our modern attitude towards flesh is far removed from what it once was when we weren’t so fucking sterilized.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 14, 2011 at 23:42

        Word, Christina. You know, I didn’t even want to deal with Harley’s various variations on the apple and rabbit in the crib.

        But tired bromides is really all they have left.

      • Walter on April 15, 2011 at 12:50

        The answer to that is the many videos that show things like young bear cubs playing with fox cubs in the wild or even the adult polar bear that plays with the huskies up in Alaska.

        Play is a biological need and it happens interspecies. Sometimes between creatures that under other circumstances would eat or fight each other. Nature is vast, it contains multitudes, to paraphrase Walt Whitman.

      • Patty on April 16, 2011 at 15:25

        Reading your response motivated to finally post a video of my 10 month old niece when I gave her the choice between offal sausage and “cheerios”…

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 15:28

        Yea, the guy who started the thread at 30BAD posted some videos, because I mentioned it in the debate. Now, of course what I was talking about was paleos giving their kids real meat to chew on.

        I have watched the videos but from what I gather, he cerry picked videos of people feeding kids pureed meat crap from baby food jars.

      • Ryan on April 18, 2011 at 18:15

        Humans actually CAN eat freshly killed animal, blood and all!!? Wow. I guess that proves that maybe humans really ARE omnivores!

    • Jules on April 15, 2011 at 05:07

      I think smearing warm bacon on people sounds hot! So bacon’s ok I guess!

      • Michael on April 15, 2011 at 11:26

        I think smearing warm bacon on people sounds hot!

        Are you single, LOL

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 11:51


        There shall never be any questioning of the Essential Metapgysical Axiom: Everything is better with bacon.

        Ha! When I first read that I didn’t think much of it. Then your comment caused me to reevaluate the possibilities. Think bacon cooked JBC (just before crispy), and cooled down so the fat doesn’t solidify. Let your imagination run wild. :)

      • Lute Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:38

        I just saw a new a item on Fox about a new Cologne Fragrance called “Bacon”

      • Lute Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:39

        The O in Bacon has an inflection or dash over it, son’t know how to do that.

      • Michael on April 15, 2011 at 14:22

        Hmmm…that, my imagination and a little wacky weed could go a long way. :-)

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 14:37

        I had no dout I could get you on board, Michael.

      • Tomas on April 15, 2011 at 14:16

        Like in Hot Shots.
        In a way, that has to be the hottest sex scene in any movie :D

  23. J. Stanton on April 14, 2011 at 18:25

    Server not found

    Firefox can’t find the server at

    The rest of the Internet is fine, and claims it’s up. Haven’t been able to reach it since 6 PM PST.


  24. johnmc on April 14, 2011 at 18:39

    Looks like Durianrider’s entire strategy is ad hominem attacks.

  25. Ryan on April 14, 2011 at 18:39

    Listening to the debate right now…I have to say it’s hard to listen to because durian’s babbling is just so stupid and incoherent…I guess you cant expect anything other than that from him.

  26. Anne on April 14, 2011 at 18:47

    On the debate Harley is one again reiterating the fact that Robb Wolf is getting fat and has a gut.
    WILL YOU PLEEEAASSE show me where his gut is?? -

    BTW Robb thanks for the pic ;).

    Harley just said he used to be a druggie! Apparently the effects have not worn off yet!

    Great job Richard!

    • Sibyl on April 17, 2011 at 08:02

      If that’s fat… do large quantities of bananas cause hallucinations?

      nice pic. ;)

  27. Mia on April 14, 2011 at 19:13

    What’s the deal with making the transition from crack addict to raw vegan? I’m seeing that heaps lately. Can NOBODY ELSE SEE that you just swap one ridiculous ineffective, addictive coping mechanism for another? Get yourself some rehab and actually DEAL with your issues instead of making up crazy fantasy worlds in which to inhabit. It’s much healthier. And you get to eat steak.

    Part of me thinks that its unfair to pick on Harley because he is obviously very mentally ill. And he looks like a 10 yr old child. But then I occasionally hear the shit he says… he’s asking for it. Give him hell.

    • Arlo on April 16, 2011 at 22:39

      I didn’t hear the debate and don’t know Harley’s history. Was he a former crack addict? Sounds like he’s a stimulant junkie, with sugar replacing crack/cocaine. As I’ve heard in a lot of these raw vegan 30 bananas and dates cases, they feel a huge desire to get a lot of cardio (seems to usually be through cycling) to burn off the sugar high.

      Related: As Nora points out in Primal Body, Primal Mind, what kind of food’s are featured at AA meetings for recovering alcoholics? Coffee, donuts, sugary foods. I met a long term recovering alcoholic in the store where I work that wanted to order some high sugar Chicken and Rib sauce by the CASE because he put it on everything.

      I’d be really interested in what’s going on physiologically from both a body/mind standpoint here.

  28. Steve on April 14, 2011 at 19:16

    Good job on the debate tonight. You speak better than you write. I agree with you about everything but sometimes I don’t like reading your post because of the profanity and lack of professionalism. You have demonstrated a higher level of sportsmanship during this debate than I thought you were capable of. So now that you’ve cleaned your diet can you clean up your potty writing?


    • keithallenlaw on April 14, 2011 at 19:52

      Potty writing? You gotta be fucking kidding? I’ll take Richards no holds bared intellectual writing any day over your self-suppressed, people pleasing garble any day. Wow…what disrespect!!!

  29. Angela on April 14, 2011 at 19:17

    It’s funny, this guy seriously does not understand science, medicine or the human metabolism. Richard, you get some serious credit for having a debate with someone who completely lacks any kinda of reasoning. He could really use a philosophy/logic course.

    How can you reason with someone who says “Richard is fat” when asked to list his scientific references?

    Btw, as someone in the medical profession, let me just clarify one (of the plethora) of things he completely gets wrong about protein deficiency: Kwashiorkor is COMPLETELY due to protein deficiency, which differentiates it from Marasmus (a caloric deficit).

    You were correct in saying “It’s as if he doesn’t understand….” I won’t finish that sentence because you can honestly finish it with anything.

    Anyway, in the end, real life experiences and results will reign winner. And science, as well. That’s why paleo/realfoods (nonindustrial) is exploding right now. If Harley doesn’t get sick soon, he’s like a smoker that lives until 90 with good health. It happens, but it’s not law.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 11:31


      I have your email and it will be used in the forthcoming death by a thousand cuts. Thanks for that.

      And thanks for taking time out from your MD medical board exams cramming to both listen and write me such a comprehensive email.

  30. Jim on April 14, 2011 at 19:23

    Great job on the debat Richard. You were well prepared and relied on logic and reason to make your case. Harley by comparison sounded shrill and emotional.

    Well done.


  31. keithallenlaw on April 14, 2011 at 19:39

    Well done Richard. The man made no sense, and just talked in circles that sounded emotionally based. He was struggling so bad with desperation. Sad fellow.

    • christina_aurelius on April 14, 2011 at 22:18

      I agree. I listened to this debate with a vegan friend of mine (I was vegan for 13 yrs, until recently) and we BOTH agreed that Harley’s arguments were based more on emotional feelings towards animals than on solid health facts. A health debate should have nothing to do with animal rights. Richard, your points were excellent and backed up properly. Having been a vegan for MORE YEARS THAN HARLEY, I was expecting him to bring more of the “facts” to the table regarding veganism. I am no longer vegan and I think I could have argued in favor of being a raw vegan more convincingly than Harley, and that’s pretty sad. My suggestion for Harley: Next time you want to argue with an intelligent American man about eating meat you should read a book or two about the subject and leave the hippie, spiritual nonsense at home.

  32. Paul C on April 14, 2011 at 20:14

    Harley’s arguments sounded like a really long energy drink ad.

  33. james on April 14, 2011 at 20:34

    so erm I haven’t paid much attention to this durianrider in the past, but I heard him talking about being drug free, and people saying crack addict..

    was he literally a crackhead or are you guys just saying that because it’s a common word associated with drugs and he’s so skinny? because that would be hilarious if he really was a crackhead

    • durianrider on April 14, 2011 at 21:44

      I used to drink as much coffee as Rob Wolfe.
      I used to do as much booze as Sean Croxton.
      I never used PED’S like Mark Sisson and De Vany/Bass do.
      I used recreational drugs like David Wolfe and Daniel Vitalis do today.

      Doing drugs doesnt make you a bad person, I just say it fucks your health. Im glad to be clean, lean n green.

      • james on April 14, 2011 at 22:49

        That’s a pretty broad and unfounded statement. While I have to agree that many if not most _drugs_ fuck your health, mainly stimulants, opiates, nicotine, excessive alcohol, and pretty much all pharmaceuticals, it’s not fair to lump entheogens in there.

        I was pretty upset when you were talking about vegans having emotional problems due to cannabis and LSD usage. There have been no studies showing that LSD or cannabis cause any sort of permanent brain damage. It’s pretty similar to the food debate, you can be Paleo or Vegan and still be fit. You can be sober or use entheogens and keep your higher mental faculties. Carl Sagan is my favorite example, especially being a physics major who smokes weed very often.

        I have to agree with Richard here, it seems like you have a holier-than-thou complex. I find that cannabis, psilocybin cubensis, salvia divinorum and peyote give incredible experiences that are quite humbling. I think you should give it a shot.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 14, 2011 at 23:33

        Interesting, James. I like weed, but not often and not much. By not often I mean maybe several times per year. And I have always been able to forget about it in two days no matter what, going all the way back almost 30 years ago.

        Now, salvia, that was several months ago. A friend had that and I decided to give it a whirl. I have never done a hallucinogen, and as such, did not understand I was hallucinating at first. What I got in short order was a sort of tunnel vision with a band spinning the perimeter, that looked like a coral snake, all accompanied by an audible loud whirling sound. It was very brief, ie over in a minute or two. I tried it I think two other times, once that same night and once a couple of nights later and concluded I’ll just stick with the weed every now and then.

        Tried coke once, 20 years ago. When I realized it was 11 am, I had a business to run, and now I was fucked for a day, I never ever did or had a desire to do it again.

        For those who like, moderate use of marijuana is to me the perfect balance.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 14, 2011 at 23:36

        To clarify, I snorted the coke the night before. It was 11 am the next day, still wired when I realized what a slippery slope this could be, and quickly.

      • colin nelson henley on April 18, 2011 at 16:37

        must have been quite the bump… I’ve tried the stuff, but seeing up close and personal how low the repurcussions can take you disavowed me PDQ… thank you very much for your writings, sir.

      • james on April 15, 2011 at 01:02

        I’m pretty surprised and joyed, I never would have pinned you as a guy who dabbles. I’d love to see more paleo dieters dabbling in entheogens, and hunting, after all what’s more primal? I pride myself in trying lots of drugs, I’ve done a few dangerous ones like Jimson Weed, which I would not recommend to anyone who doesn’t like horror movies, and most of today’s CNS stimulants and opiates. At the moment I stay away from anything that comes in a pill, except for MDMA, which I’ll do maybe twice a year.

        I have a really great relationship with Cannabis which I never plan to end. I do want to cut back of course on the smoking, just because of the tar, luckily cannabinoids dissolve perfectly in butter, coconut oil, and alcohol. And there’s always vaporizers too.

      • Jim on April 17, 2011 at 02:21


        What you choose to do with your body is no busines of mine. However, you are way out of line to boast pubilcally of your use of an elicit drug.

        I am beginning to think that DurianRider has you pegged about right.

        Anyway, I am out of here.

        I acutally would enjoy paying you a vist to see if your body and balls in any way match the crap your mouth puts out. I very much doubt it . In my experience, the people that talk the loudest, and the foulest, are the biggest pussies.

        James: You are simply an abomination in the eyes of God.


      • A Eilola on April 17, 2011 at 02:34

        “You are simply an abomination in the eyes of God”

        Stick your “god” up your arse. DEEP.

      • Jim on April 17, 2011 at 02:47

        I refuse to correspond with someone that doesn’t even know how to spell the word “ass”.

      • A Eilola on April 17, 2011 at 03:09

        Luke 6:37:

        “Do not judge, and you will not be judged”

        You don’t like Jesus or why you are not following his teachings?

        Re: Arse

        As you can see, I spelled it just right.

        “I refuse to correspond with someone that doesn’t even know how to spell the word “ass”.”

        You just did.

      • Jim on April 17, 2011 at 03:22

        You are using an outdated version of the bible you bloody cretin.

        The correct quote is ” Judge not lest ye be judged”.

        There is a special place in Hell reserved for blasphemers such as yourself.

        The correct word is “ass” and not “arse” you fricking meathead


      • A Eilola on April 17, 2011 at 05:10

        Outdated version? Who gives these people the right to change the God’s holy word? They will surely burn in hell for it. Your version is the only correct one and if someone else has a different version it’s wrong? Gotcha!

        “I refuse to correspond with someone that doesn’t even know how to spell the word “ass”.”

        What happened, did you change your mind? How come?

        “The correct word is “ass” and not “arse” you fricking meathead”

        Sorry, I don’t take spelling lessons from a guy who takes his moral guidance from an invisible magic man in the sky. And you don’t get to decide whether a dictionary is correct or not.

      • Erik on April 17, 2011 at 06:04

        I’m quite certain the “correct” quote would be something in hebrew or aramaic and might contain subtle connotations of phrasing or vocabulary that are not present in any available english translations.

        If you consider the bible to be god’s holy word, and wish to truly understand it in its original form, then go learn some dead languages. Otherwise, STFU.

        Of course, given your ignorance of the term “arse,” which has a long history of usage and may predate the term “ass” in being applied as a label for one’s posterior, it seems your grasp of living languages isn’t great either.

      • Liz Downunder on April 17, 2011 at 08:14

        Yeah, Jim, right on. To quote Stephen Colbert: “”If God wanted us to get high, He’d have created plants that became psychoactive when eaten or smoked.”


      • Brian Scott on April 17, 2011 at 08:43

        Jim: You’ll have to quote me where it says in the Bible that recreational drug use is an abomination.

      • Bob Connors on April 17, 2011 at 08:52

        Jim- didn’t you say you were out of here?

      • Kevin Hughes on April 17, 2011 at 09:11

        An ass was what Jesus rode in on, his arse was what was kicked in the end.

      • gallier2 on April 17, 2011 at 09:29

        Yeah, because the bible was written in antiquated english, arsehole.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 17, 2011 at 09:41


        That’s interesting. First of all “illicit” is merely an arbitrary line drawn by State edict and of course that means nothing to me.

        Anyone with half a brain knows how marijuana stacks up against alcohol or abused prescription drugs in terms of public safety.

        The other part I fund interesting is that’s its not so much the fact that I do smoke some weed now and then, but that I have the audacity to simply admit it, publicly.

        Far better I should keep such “illicit” activity in the closet, I guess.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 17, 2011 at 09:44

        Or, a person could chain smoke 5 packs of cigarettes per day and while ill-advised, take a hit or two off a bong, now it’s “illicit.”

        Funny how people think or, actually, don’t.

      • Princess Consuela on May 1, 2011 at 09:56

        Really? Spew your hatred elsewhere.

        When Jesus said “judge not lest ye be judged” (or any other vernacular… ), the context was that to any degree you judge people the same level of judgement will be used on you.

        So… prepare yourself, I guess. :]

      • Abe on April 15, 2011 at 07:33

        trolling on other people’s sites and blocking comments on your sites DOES make you a bad person.

        Being a walking skeleton and “advising” people on health DOES make you a bad person.

        And I’ll take your challenges any day of the week. I can beat your ass in any sprint, or how about some real, outdoors hiking? Like 7 days worth, and no sherpas, you gotta haul in all your own food and supplies. We’ll see who leaves that one… I may be eating vegan by the end of it…

        And my kid just bit the nose off a goat at the petting zoo….

      • TandooriChicken on April 15, 2011 at 09:37

        If you do go on a weeklong backpack camp/hike far removed from civilization, please do give details!

      • Abe on April 15, 2011 at 14:53

        I do it often! I live near Copper Canyon, Mexico, some of the hardest hiking in North America, where you can wake up at 1200 feet elevation, and eat lunch at 9000 feet. I’ve done hikes where we wake up in the bottom of a canyon and go swimming, and when we camp in the mountains at night, it will snow.

        I invite ANY vegan to keep up with us. I have seen many a vegetarian break down and eat meat on those hikes, basically out of exhaustion. It isn’t endurance hiking here, it’s brute strength, and it’ll test your body.

        We’ve done several 21 day hikes, but the most common is a 10 day hike. You gotta carry everything you want with you, so no crates of fruit, I guarantee you! Pemmican is light weight!

      • Eric on April 15, 2011 at 16:22

        I’m doing a thru-hike of the Pacific Crest Trail using a primal-based diet (more starchy carbs than I’d normally have due to the vast calories needed and pemmican being super expensive!). I subscribe to the PCT-L, a mailing list discussing the hike, and have read several emails about vegetarians eating fish or other meats on the trail and hiking longer, feeling better, and having more energy overall.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 16:51

        Abe, I had no idea you spoke Greek.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 16:56

        uh oh, Eric, more “not vegans” “not vegetarians.”

        But also more reality check. Either you have a vegetarian society like India where you could potentially have support even in the way out, or you resort to meat. Vegans don’t even get started. They have to stay very close to a food source. Raw vegans is laughable, oh and by the way, did anyone notice how Harley hedged on that so much, talking about rice, quinoa, and other staples, none of which are raw vegan. That’s a firm admission that raw veganism is utter bullshit. If it only works at home, how fucki mg stupid is that?

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 16:58

        Damn soft iPad keyboard…

      • Abe on April 15, 2011 at 17:35

        it only works at home and when you have people delivering you food from all over the globe…. talk about unsustainable.

      • Abe on April 15, 2011 at 18:00

        ha! and just for clarity, when I said I might be eating vegan by the end of the hike, I meant eating a vegan human (duranrider’s failed corpse), not eating the vegan diet….

        as far as I am concerned, animals with vegans diets are my food….

      • Zoebird on April 15, 2011 at 21:47

        I’m going to go out on a limb here and write about “vegetarians” in India.

        Vegetarianism as a practice of discipline is not absolute in any given place in India.

        It can run the gamut from very strict raw food diet to ones that include — in addition to dairy products — also eggs, chicken, and fish. Typically, raw vegan diets in india tend to be “short lived” — a purification process, something done only for a short duration of time, and only done by certain “classes” of people. That most notably being, sunyasins (renunciants) who are doing a given style of meditative practice.

        All other forms of dietary habits have to do with the person’s station in life, their overall health, and the work that they do. Likewise, location plays a huge part in it.

        In addition, Ayurveda — the “medicinal science” of india — asserts that food is often medicine. For some people, consuming meat or animal products is the medicine. for others, going vegetarian for a time is the medicine. It really depends upon the individual and their specific needs.

        So, it is largely innacurate to call inda a “vegetarian society.” particularly when vegetarian can include, on occasion, fish and chicken.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 22:24

        I should have written “vegetarian societies in India” or something like that. Having many India friends locally I’m somewhat familiar with the differences.

      • anand srivastava on April 18, 2011 at 05:43

        I am not sure I have ever seen a “raw” food vegetarian in India. Maybe in the new world with Internet, and so called Raw Vegan diets, there are some misled folks. In India the dominant form of vegetarianism includes milk and milk alone, not eggs or fish or meat. There are exceptions though. Some coastal societies particularly the Bengali’s consider Fish as vegetarian. There are some others that include Meat that was offered to God (including sometimes Buffalo aka Bison) as part of their vegetarian diet. Egg has started to get into the vegetarian diet as people have started to become more relaxed about vegetarianism.

        The only thing that is never considered outside vegetarianism, is milk. It is a very important part of the meal. You can go to the Kerala and Tamil Nadu as far as they are from the Cow Belt but they also use ghee, milk and yogurt. Infact no meal is considered complete in the south India without yogurt. In the North Ghee was the most important part of the meal. No religious festival is complete without burning a ghee lamp.

        Of course you won’t find any place where everybody is vegetarian, but there are several families that observe vegetarianism, and many of them are quite against allowing anybody in their family to marry with a person from a non-vegetarian family.

      • Erin on April 16, 2011 at 15:34

        But, Harley, sugar IS your drug (as well as obsessive exercise and picking fights with others).

        If I gave a little kid some of your “datorade” they’d be bouncing off the walls and over-emotional (wait, that sounds familiar…)

      • Arlo on April 16, 2011 at 22:44

        Broken. Fucking. Record.

        And as Erin said:

        But, Harley, sugar IS your drug (as well as obsessive exercise and picking fights with others).

  34. Jim Arkus on April 15, 2011 at 12:21

    I’ve been waiting for you to post about this since last night so I could comment.

    I thought it was great. I’ll admit, I went in knowing that Harley wouldn’t sway me, but I also thought I would at least try to LIKE the guy, you know? Couldn’t do it. Between the constant “you know what I mean,” and the weird jabs at various people, not to mention that stupid fucking line about babies not eating chicken (babies also don’t talk, what’s your point?), I very quickly got bored listening to him.

    You handled yourself excellently. I think it would have been very easy to go “YOU’RE A MORON!!” and hang up, but I think you showed a very appropriate level of outrage. And thank you for posting your opening argument, I’ll be passing that along.

    You know what it reminded me of? When Matt Taibbi debated a member of the 911 Truth Movement a few years ago. It’s a very long read, but I think you’ll see why I say that:

    So check it out, particularly Matt’s comments in Part II. I mean, that thing about Denise Minger not being a real person? I think that says volumes about where his head is at and how he views the world. How do you argue with someone like that? You can’t. So I think you handled yourself very well. Next time tell Sisson he can take the day off and you can go kick some more ass.

    • Jared on April 15, 2011 at 14:00

      That was the most insane argument: Denise Minger might not even be a real person.


      So either she is an unqualified 21 year old blogger, or she doesn’t even exist and the geniuses who created her persona, the brilliant scientists who did the analysis decided to create an unqualified 21 year old blogger to hide behind?

      To make sense of that…. god… I don’t know.

      If any vegan reading this still doubts Denise is a real person. I think my sister-in-law is the PhD Richard was referring to who is working with Denise. Contact me on the linked blog about page and I will help ease your doubts. But then… If you believe even for a second Denise might not be a real person… you’d probably just rather believe that I’m not a real person either than to even believe for a second that “The China Study” is such a sad book that even a 21 year old English graduate can rip it to shreds…

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 14:24

        Jared, that comment is not worthy in the slightest of a WORD salute.

        That’s because it is SO WORD!

  35. Jo on April 15, 2011 at 13:39

    Richard, I think you did great! One very strong point i think you made ( that stands out to me now ) is that your debate opponent was relying on outdated scientific data. You were spot on. Vaguely reminiscent of the debate/discussion I watched on Youtube with Gary Taubes, Dean Ornish and a member of the AHA ( American Heart Association ). I do think it is quite *easy* to draw a correlation between obesity and eating fat, so I don’t necessarily blame people for subscribing to this mode of thinking ( which by the way, has been reinforced in the US for decades.. ) .. this however doesn’t negate the fact that it simply is *not* valid.

    I’m not sure if you’ve seen it, but in the lecture by Dr. Lustig ( UCSF ) called “Sugar : The Bitter Truth” he shows a diagram which illustrates that Americans are actually consuming LESS calories from fat than they did back in the 1970s ( a steady decline, actually ) and we all know that in 1977 the government recommended we lower our fat intake from the notion/idea that eating fat is associated with heart disease. ( Link to Lecture here : )

    And did that help? You can come to your own conclusions- check out this graph delineating obesity rates since 1960 ( Link to Graph : )

    • christina_aurelius on April 15, 2011 at 13:46

      I saw the Lustig lecture and it was so interesting that I passed it along to my father (he is in his early 60’s.) My dad, after viewing this lecture, stopped eating added sugar and cut back on his bread intake drastically. He has now lost 16 lbs in about 6 weeks of eliminating sugar from his diet. He exercises a few times a week, eats meat and fats. Its kind of a long video but it’s worth seeing if you want some real science behind the evils of sugar.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:51

      Thanks Jo. I have a post long back on the Lustig video. I’m sure you can find it if you search the blog for Lustig.

  36. OwenR on April 15, 2011 at 01:15

    I am delurking for the first time in my life due to this smug emaciated vegan cultist. While I appreciate the need for dialogue and debate, I think it’s pretty clear that he wasn’t worth engaging with in the first place. All his written work shows strong evidence of shallow, emotional thinking, which is bad enough, but furthermore his inability to spell or use appropriate grammar is really fucking infuriating. If you’re incapable of getting through a sentence using punctuation or regular spelling how the hell can you be expect to be treated as some sort of authority on the monstrous complexity of the human body? Oh, wait, “he bases everything on results,” that’s why he doesn’t need credentials, references, or anything but anecdotal evidence. Herpderpderp. Richard, you have a great website and an entertaining style, but I think engaging with this guy was a mismatch from the start.

    • Arlo on April 16, 2011 at 22:49

      Yeah, reminds me of a recent “discussion” on The Atheist Experience with Ray Comfort. It’s amusing to listen to, but ultimately not productive because they are so irrational and driven more by emotion than logic and rational, evidenced discourse.

      It’s amazing how annoying Australian accents can sound when backed by irrational beliefs (and don’t get me wrong, a woman with a New South Wales accent is totally seductive! ;) )

      • Richard Nikoley on April 17, 2011 at 10:18


        That program simply hurts my ears to listen to. I grew up around that sort of “logic.”

  37. Bob Connors on April 15, 2011 at 05:45

    Don’t know about anyone else, but this debate totally changed my mind about Durian.

    Look at this list from wikipedia about the characteristics of a cult:

    “A checklist, made by professor Eileen Barker, in which traits of groups that can evolve to be dangerous are described. Barker stated that her list was based on empirical research. The traits named include:”

    ” 1. A movement that separates itself from society, either geographically or socially; ” (no outside comments on 30bad, internal dissension is shut down quickly, failure of former vegans is solved by isolation of said former vegans as “them” from the start- eg “Lierre Kieth was never a vegan” D.R.)
    ” 2. Adherents who become increasingly dependent on the movement for their view on reality; “(raw vegan lifestyle is a worldview, not just a diet)
    “3 .Important decisions in the lives of the adherents are made by others; “(eat this, never THAT. Say this, not that (in 30bad restricted comments section) )
    ” 4 .Making sharp distinctions between us and them, divine and Satanic, good and evil, etc. that are not open for discussion; “(animal for food is murder- lots of bloody language and imagery from DR last night- kids attacking animals at petting zoo, etc ; . Peace is good (“increase the peace, go vegan!”. Animals as food is murder and thus is bad. We’re good, they’re bad.)
    ” 5. Leaders who claim divine authority for their deeds and for their orders to their followers; “(recovering druggie who saw the light and decided to bring “peace” to the world by converting as many people as possible to his movement. Peace is a divine concept.)
    ” 6.Leaders and movements who are unequivocally focused on achieving a certain goal.”(control over what 30bad members eat, control over what 30 bad members say, ending “outsiders” use of animals as food products)


    • Walter on April 15, 2011 at 13:00

      You might like this site, which discusses authoritarian followers and leaders.

  38. John on April 15, 2011 at 05:47

    I’ve searched daily for evidence that cholesterol and saturated fats are bad for us, and I think I’ve kept an open mind about it. Honestly, there’s nothing out there except association studies, and for every association, there’s a muddy lake of evidence. There is absolutely no level 1 evidence supporting eather as dangerous. None! [China studies and such do not demonstrate mechanisms and cannot possibly isolate any variables. They are basically assumptions.] Dr. Krauss IMHo has basically dismissed all of these SF studies.

    Yet the die-hard vegan, the Big Pharma driven scientists, and all the underlings in the health communities blindly follow the dogma. I didn’t listen to the debate, but I’d lay down $100 that the vegan blamed cholesterol and/or saturated fats for heart disease but didn’t supply one bit of actual evidence beyond an association study.

    You as a veggie-pusher have to show me some real science before I can take anything seriously.

    • noah on April 15, 2011 at 08:38

      “I’d lay down $100 that the vegan blamed cholesterol and/or saturated fats for heart disease but didn’t supply one bit of actual evidence beyond an association study.”

      Numerous times. And the obligatory strawman ” Dr Atkins died obese with heart disease. “

    • Paul C on April 15, 2011 at 09:09

      You would have won the bet of course. Any situation that didn’t fit his story was glossed over with a rhyming sound-bite, or tagged to an ominous inevitable future cardiac event.

      He makes a fine snake-oil salesman (no snakes harmed in the making). Big Pharma would do well to hire him as a rep.

  39. Bob Connors on April 15, 2011 at 05:55

    Clarity for the fat-deprived among us: those are my comments in parenthesis, quotes from Barker are in quotes.

  40. christina_aurelius on April 15, 2011 at 09:22

    I am a 32 year old female who became vegetarian at age 16 and vegan at 19. In that time I have tried macrobiotics, a low-fat vegan diet, a “eat it if it’s vegan” diet, green smoothie diets and a raw foodist diet (MULTIPLE times based on what different raw food guys/gals suggest eating) and in this period of time I have ALWAYS been significantly overweight, tired, riddled with skin problems (never had acne till I went vegan), unhappy with how I looked and felt, and diagnosed with PCOS. Surrounded by vegans, including my late-husband, I stuck to the diet and admonished all animal products because I believed that this was the ideal way for me to eat and that I must just be “doing it wrong.” I am an avid reader and have read books by Peter Singer, Dr. Neal Bernard, John Robbins, David Wolfe, Dr. Gabriel Cousens, and other vegan folks, and I feel I have a pretty good idea on what is and is not a balanced vegan diet as well as the ethical debates behind the vegan diet. My late-husband, who was very active and lean, was very much into raw food and ate a raw diet for stretches at a time before falling off the wagon to eat vegan chinese food every now and then (we all have our vices!) I, on the other hand, grew fatter and more unhappy with my looks even though I was eating a vegan diet with copious amounts of raw fruits.

    When a male friend of mine decided to stop being vegan and eat a Paleo diet recently, I was shocked at how quickly he started to lose weight and have visible muscle tone after years of being a chubby vegan (he does exercise a lot and always has but now the results are finally visible.) His transformation inspired me to take a look at the diet I had been suffering through for all these years and I recently gave up veganism, and vegetarianism, for good. I have WAY more energy, a better attitude and my skin looks great (way less blackheads and I have yet to get a nasty zit like I did just 4 months ago.) I plan to incorporate exercise more after a back muscle I am nursing heals up and I am confident that I will lose weight and continue to feel great.

    I know that some people can be slim and happy as vegans and that’s nice, more power to them, but I do not believe that every body is suited for that diet. I never thrived as a vegan and I can honestly say that even though I know, and have met, hundreds of vegans not a single one has a body or energy level that I envy. Many are, as most of you assume, thin (skinny fat, in many cases) but some are like I was and just straight up fat and out of shape. However, looking at some of the ladies and gents that eat a Paleo/Primal styled diet and exercise properly I can honestly say that I really want to look like them! Further more, I hope that I age as well as Mark Sisson (super handsome) or Art DeVany. Art DeVany is still a beefcake who pulls cars up driveways by a rope when most men his age are shuffling around inside their homes doing crossword puzzles and eating stool softeners.

    I really agree with the idea that people should do what is right for them. If being vegan, raw or cooked, gives a person a sense of well-being and they are healthy and happy then they should stay that way. If it doesn’t, I think one owes it to themselves to try other things without feeling guilted into staying with a diet that does not give them positive results. I have tried it and my conclusion is that a high-carb, low-fat, raw, or cooked, vegan diet does not make me feel or look good. Life is too short to suffer through shitty ways of eating that make me tired, grouchy and fat.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 11:26

      Beautiful and inspiring, Christina. Good for you and thanks especially for sharing your experience. I see these stories, primarily, as a means of giving other vegans the permission they’re looking for to explore and experiment.

      I forwarded your comment to Art. Hilarious description and right on the money.

      • A Eilola on April 15, 2011 at 14:00

        Don’t know if you saw this one yet:


      • christina_aurelius on April 16, 2011 at 09:18

        Thanks for the link! I LOVE Etsy and I just ordered that pin. I will wear it with pride.

      • christina_aurelius on April 15, 2011 at 13:41

        I currently attend UCI where Art DeVany was associated with at some point so I am flattered that he will see my compliment!

    • Art De Vany on April 15, 2011 at 13:56


      I am more handsome. Check my Zurich Minds lecture photo on Facebook.

      Nice and balanced statement.

    • Dave, RN on April 15, 2011 at 22:56

      Funny you should mention the zits. I have twin 22 year old neices. One is a vegan, the other a meat eater. The vegan one has a zitty complexion. The meat eater’s is perfect and smooth. Hmmm…

      • Christina on April 16, 2011 at 15:36

        I’m telling you. Just this morning while drying off from a shower I was taking a good hard look at my skin in the mirror. I couldn’t find a single blemish! This isn’t to say I do not get them still but they are rare now as opposed to a constant marker on my face. The changes in my diet include: eating WAYYYY more fat, less fruit, no bread, no added sugars, no pasta, no grains, etc. It could be just from eliminating all that sugar. Whatever it is, I am glad. It’s nice to finally like my face!

    • Paul Verizzo on April 16, 2011 at 04:59

      “a balanced vegan diet”…… heads exploding…… oxymoron……

      Seriously, nice post!

      • christina_aurelius on April 16, 2011 at 09:24

        I know, I know! I really just wanted to reiterate that I wasn’t sitting around eating chips and salsa all day or “vegan” cookies from the dollar store. I ate veggies, fruits, nuts, whole grains, smoothies, and all many of fake meats and tofu stuff =)

  41. Laurie d on April 15, 2011 at 10:10

    Something seems a bit rotten in Denmark. I did a little searching on the Internet for Harley johnstone and the races he competed successfully in in australia. I found a lot of links where he was claiming to have done so well, including a 2008 Australian 24 hour solo ride. Hmmm, funny, this link doesn’t seem to acknowledge this: http:/
    Perhaps there is a reason for this but I could find no other reference to his participation in this or another race in 2008. However I did find one in 2009: http:/
    Apparently poor Harley petered out after 17 laps, did not finish (57 others did, including men in their 50s) andhe quit after 12 hours. So maybe I’m not looking in the right places? Care to give us some credible race result links, durianrider? Sorry for typos – from an iPhone!

  42. Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 10:50




    Sorry for all caps, but I wanted the comment to stand out.

  43. VeganWarrior on April 15, 2011 at 11:11

    Speaking as one who was quite literally one of the biggest trolls on the entire internet some 10 years ago, I say that you need to stop feeding this guy. I can assure you that you’re playing right into his hand.

    I’m not proud that I was such a troll, but I can tell you that trolls don’t exist without people who take the bait. This guy is posting SOLELY to get his kicks. He “debated” Richard solely to get his kicks. I’ve certainly gone through more elaborate deals than what he’s done in order to play out a troll job.

    Yeah, I know it’s pathetic and immature, but I promise you it is what’s going on here. So if you can restrain yourselves from getting in that big comment at him, he’ll pipe down. Robb Wolf’s comment showed that he understands this reality.

    Also speaking as a former troll (yep, pathetic, I know), I can tell you that this guy is horrible at it. A rank amateur. It’s probably a compliment to you guys that you’re falling for it, in that it shows that you’re not overly internet-savvy, jaded people.

    • Tomasz R. on April 16, 2011 at 08:55

      He not just talks, he actually eats the way he describes. I wouldn’t call it trolling, since he practices what he preaches.

      • Lyle on April 16, 2011 at 14:20

        An internet troll posts for one reason only: to piss people off. It doesn’t matter if he practices what he preaches, he phrases his opinions in the most insulting way possible on purpose. Rational discourse is difficult with him because we’re all looking for a well argued debate with facts and figures. He’s looking for attention and he’s getting it.

        VeganWarrior couldn’t be more correct that the guy isn’t very good at being a troll. Take a look at reddit or digg for some real top notch stuff.

  44. Ryan on April 15, 2011 at 11:21

    I listened to the debate last night. My conclusion would be to stop listening to Durian all together. What he says makes no sense, he doesn’t want to think outside the box, and apparently he’s the greatest athlete on earth. He makes claims to things he has no evidence for, and he bathes in the attention that comes from said claims like I supposedly bathe in the blood of the animals I brutally slaughter for my diet. He promotes peace and love but does more mudslinging than anyone. Let him eat his 30 bananas a day and run his 10ks and forget about him.

  45. Travis on April 15, 2011 at 11:51

    You were cogent, well spoken, and stayed on the topic of each question. Harley, on the other hand, kept permuting the same old vapid non sequiturs. Good work, Richard.

  46. Melissa McEwen on April 15, 2011 at 12:04

    I was disappointed that you gave him publicity. Does he even have a high school degree? A college degree? Any education in upper-level science whatsoever?

    But in some ways he’s genius because he’s a lower-class unemployed skinny beta male who has figured out how trollish behavior can net a following, particularly of somewhat attractive woman.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 12:17


      This is something I’m going to address specifically later.

      In the meantime, realize this: I am trying to get Harley more traffic.


      • Tim Huntley on April 15, 2011 at 12:50

        Sorry I missed the debate, but I think it is damn smart to shine a light on this guy. Let the vegan folks see what an idiot he is. How many vegan lurkers do you think have found their way to Richard’s site today? My guess is a lot. It’s not about trying to convert Durian but giving a seed of doubt to his followers.


      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:31

        stats are way up, Tim. Broke a record for visitors on page in any instant. Previous was about 212 and today hit 230 reading at once.

      • Julie on April 15, 2011 at 15:17

        “…realize this: I am trying to get Harley more traffic.”

        I finally understand. Brilliant!

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 17:06

        Julie, who better to be thentop spokesman for Raw Vegan than Harley? Name one. He’s perfect and we should all rally so he beats out any competition.

        Moreover, I want 30bad to not have 1,500 members, but 10,000 or more. That way, Harley will have to choose between going out on a ride, or monitoring posts to make sure no one is pissing in his pool.

        Y’all think so conventionally.

      • Bob Connors on April 16, 2011 at 09:02

        ohhhh, smart, Richard! Love it.

      • Joe Brancaleone on April 16, 2011 at 23:58

        ah, lateral thinking. I get it.

        I understand this was something for the uninformed raw-veg crowd to ponder, more than anyone else. Yet, this whole melodramatic gig just makes me crave a real debate. when I’m predisposed to a certain position I think its important to revisit and scrutinize first principles, especially by external scrutiny. I want to see the best counterarguments out there, from the best representatives of the contra. From someone who proves they at least know what position it is they’re attacking. That’s real debate, seeing how your positions stands up against the best counter arguments. Maybe some day

    • Michael on April 15, 2011 at 14:27

      But in some ways he’s genius because he’s a lower-class unemployed skinny beta male who has figured out how trollish behavior can net a following, particularly of somewhat attractive woman.

      Whew, there you go, pulling no punches again. LOL!

    • Tim Starr on April 15, 2011 at 16:49

      Veganism, like all lefty religions, is nothing more than a beta-male mating strategy.

  47. Kurt G Harris MD on April 15, 2011 at 12:11

    The debate was both lopsided and absurd. Like watching a day care center armed with nothing but stuffed animals engage a fully armed us marine battalion.

    • Teddy P on April 15, 2011 at 12:35

      You meant armed with stuffed fruits, amirite?

    • David Black on April 15, 2011 at 13:40

      Indeed, the debate’s audience would have been better served if Richard’s opponent had been someone with a background in nutritional science, someone who might argue, for instance, that a high-fruit vegan diet reduces methionine enough to down-regulate IGF-1, reducing cancer risk and promoting longevity.

      McCarty MF et al., “The low-methionine content of vegan diets may make methionine restriction feasible as a life extension strategy,” Medical Hypotheses (2008), doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2008.07.044

      • Alex Thorn on April 15, 2011 at 15:20

        In rats – humans are not rats. I don’t see that that particular study says anything relevant about a healthy person eating a meat-based diet with regard to reducing cancer risk – a low methionine diet is likely only going to benefit someone with an underlying maladaptive methionine metabolism. One possible cause of this is a lack of methyl donors in the diet and these are nutrients like choline and betaine found in beef and eggs!

      • Kurt G Harris MD on April 15, 2011 at 21:04

        “Medical Hypotheses” is about as peer reviewed as a late night infomercial.

      • Contemplationist on April 16, 2011 at 16:54

        So what? The former editor Bruce Charlton is brilliant. Med Hypothesis was supposed to be a contrarian one-man ideas journal. Peer Review can go to hell for all I care. Let a million eyes on it. Let single editors take RESPONSIBILITY for their content and not be subsidized by the state. Those climate scientist charlatans were also peer-reviewed.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 17:23


        Without looking into either of your claims, I’d say you make a fair point, the problem being of course that perhaps you end up publishing even more warm piles of stinky shit that the peer review ones do.

        I don’t think that was Kurt’s point and I think you must know that. It’s simply a convenient way to dismiss bullshit without having to take time out, once again, to look at a rat study.

        Kurt is a fried. We talk on the phone. I can assure you he’s not a robot that reads studies 24×7.

        But he does have 30+ years experience in this odd business. If you don’t think he has a well developed nose, then make a case. After all, all human beings are limited to 24 hours in a single day.

    • colin nelson henley on April 16, 2011 at 06:46

      a line from the movie ’40 Year Old Virgin’ springs to mind; “It’s like pistol-whipping a blind kid!”

  48. Jim mcbride on April 15, 2011 at 12:31

    You did exceptionally well Richard! You kept it light and to the facts(isn’t that what paleo should be?).
    You were well prepared with your guns loaded unlike your opponent. I found it very odd that he kept calling paleo people “Fat”. Look at Keith Norris, Art Devany, or even John Durrant (whom I’ve seen in person, and is lean, strong, and fast!!) also his biggest arguments were about smearing food on his “partners” back??? And walking down the street eating food? (I’d guess you’d have to worry about walking and eating when you have to eat every 2 hours??) also about not cleaning pots and pans? Really? If you don’t like cleaning pots, buy a fucking grill!! You did a great job!! Thank you Richard.

  49. Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 12:48

    My favorite comment from the 30bad forum on the debate thus far:

    “‘Maybe we will bring him over to the fruity side one day and he can actually get lean!
    sure! extend an invite to the guy!'”

    just make it clear that he has to post according to 30bad guidelines.”

    What a pithy encapsulation.

  50. Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:03

    Another gem from that 30bad thread:

    “I think what it boils down to is that humans are trying to force themselves to evolve into omnivores. And it is failing. Big time.”

    And the mind boggles.

    • Janey on April 15, 2011 at 13:21

      Oh, Richard. Why should anyone listen to you? You’ve merely “been hoodwinked by the meat/dairy industry”. You poor schmuck.

    • Alex K on April 15, 2011 at 13:39


      Before I leave my comment, I just want to make it clear that I am not a vegan. However, a low fat diet, high in carbohydrates( the unprocessed version), and adequate in protein has been shown in numerous studies to cause weight loss and keep it off. Also, paleos need to realize that the only way to build large amounts of muscle is with a high carb diet. Thats right, how many natural bodybuilders do you know that eat low carbs…absolutely zero. You need carbs to restore your glycogen levels(not just post workout, that is just ridiculous), and constatntly be able to crank up the intensity by always having your glycogen levels full. Yes, I know fat can also be eaten in high amounts and used as an energy source, but it is not near as efficient as carbs, and protein is just piss poor at converting into a usable energy source, and makes your urine quite expensive. If you want to look good and be healthy, you must do the work, and doing the work comes from your energy sources(glycogen). Lets not throw all the hatorade on fruits and carbs, and realize a balance of all is needed to truly build a distinguished body. Scott Abel’s blog is a great source for people wanting to achieve a distinguished body, not a paleo body.

      • Alex Thorn on April 15, 2011 at 15:07

        Why do you need you muscle glycogen stores to be full? Even an intense weight-training session won’t drain muscle glycogen reserves by more than a third or so and this should easily be replenished on a moderate carb intake – you don’t NEED a HIGH carb diet at all. Muscles are primarily made out of protein not carbs.

      • Alex K on April 15, 2011 at 16:14

        You are not training at a high enough INTENSITY long enough, if you are only draining glycogen stores by a third. Do you know what the absorption rate of glycogen is? about 5% every 2 hours. So how do you plan on ever training at a high enough intensity to grow neurally in your workout progressions. Low carb is great for people who don’t engage in high intensity exercise. Just don’t infuse a great muscular body with low carb, because you will not have the energy to do so. Muscles are made out of protein?…really….well how does protein get there?….dude do your research on basic exercise physiology. If we only needed protein to enduce muscle growth, where are all these big muscular paleo eaters, or for that matter protein eaters. Paul, I was not aware that paleo encompassed high carb eating. Richard is not a high carb advocater. If anything he advocates low carb eating. I am just embracing a different view that works well. You should not be criticizing the vegan guy just because it works for him….Paleo advocaters don’t have all the answers either.

      • Clifton on April 15, 2011 at 16:28

        Carb intake depends on personal needs/energy expenditure. Richard is NOT advocating low carb. He has said so explicitly. How have you missed this?

        Separately, durian making the case that we should eat what kids put in their mouth is pretty funny to me-as they will put ANYTHING in their mouth.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 17:15

        Alek K, your ignorance is astounding.

        Look up Martin Berkhan and leangains. He will school your ass in a second about any aspect of protein intake.

        He weighs under 200 and DLs over 600. He is ripped and mighty to shreds. And he’s paleo-ish.

      • Alex K on April 15, 2011 at 17:48


        Strength does not equal muscle size. If that were the case the strongest men in the world we be the biggest. Strength is just an external cue. When a newbie first deadlifts 100 pounds, then in a month deadlifts 200 pounds, did his muscle size increase by twice the size or at all? Strength is a neural adaptation. As for Martin he does have some muscle size, but should be much bigger claiming the number of years he has been training. He lacks thickness and is almost anorexic looking near his shoulder blades. He even claims he had to start eating carbs in his meals to gain muscle size. If you know how the body works, you would know extra(high) protein intake induces gluco-neo-genesis(regeneration of sugar), this entails protein being stripped of nitrogen through the liver, leaving you with strong smelling urine(expensive urine) and dehydration. Over time this will effect your workout intensity levels, and you must restore glycogen levels with carbs. High protein diets are very metabollically expensive on your system. Carbs are a better source of glycogen for people who work out(physically active), low carbing it will only make it nearly impossible( due to low glycogen levels)for you to raise intensity levels in workouts, which is not just strength.

        Abe, obviously we all know you need adequate protein to grow, but to infuse grains with obesity is just not intelligent. Most of the world lives off of starches and grains. Yet America is has one of the highest obesity rates, and the most easily accessed protein sources. Obviously protein will not make you fat if you are in homeostasis, but excess protein, which usually from animals entails high fat sources as well, and processed carbs, will make you fat. Any macronutrient in excess will make you fat. Point being, it would be great if we could all workout and just eat fatty protein and look and feel awesome, but this is just not how most people bodies are designed. You will crave carbs, because your body needs them and wants them, why deny what you are born to do.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 08:06

        “Does this website not promote fasting, and IFing in general? Yes, it does. Which means when you work out fasted you are further hindering yourself of progress.”

        Alex K, do you actually _know_ anything, or do you just spout tired conventional “wisdom” you heard somewhere?

        For instance, have you ever not eaten for 24-36 hours and gone to the gym and lifted heavy, really heavy? Or, done a crossfit or circuit style lighter workout? Run sprints? Done box jumps until you can’t lift a leg?

        Well, every single one of my 2-3 weekly workouts save for one or two, since December 2007 have been in a fasted state. At minimum, 12-15 hours, and upwards of 24, 30, and even 36 hours at times.

        I squat 250# for 8 reps and I deadlift 325# for 5 reps, and that’s first set. I also do weighted chins with 20# added to my 175# BW for 6 reps. I bench 185# for 8 reps.

        Have any idea where I started? Less than half of that — Way less in some cases.

        Animals don’t hunt on full bellies, or haven’t you ever noticed or wondered why natural selection seems to have worked things out such that animals perform at their best when hungry, and they can go at it a long time without success. Of course, humans are different, eh, and we need that pre-workout nutrition, that post workout nutrition and on and on.

        You know, there’s a book out just now by a mountaineer and I was listening to an interview on NPR the other day. What the guy set out to do was read the journals of all the mountaineer, naturalist, surveyors who explored and mapped out the sierras and do it just like they did: a small pack with little food, no water, no blanket, and out for days on end, alone, at altitude in the Sierras.

        I’ve gone on eight hour hikes with water only and this is starting out in the morning without breakfast. But you wouldn’t know anything about that because you’ve never tried it and are blinded by “science.”

        There’s a ton of shit on Martin’s site about fasted training, but try this recent one out.

      • TandooriChicken on April 15, 2011 at 19:37

        Alex K,

        Man, have you got your physiology ass-backwards. (Maybe your priorities, too). First of all, since when have real men ever put looking strong over actually being strong? Some of the most muscular-looking bodybuilders are actually really fucking weak. They can rep out curls for sets of 30 but struggle to bench their own bodyweight. Not to mention that their “sport” involves dancing on stage in man-thongs in front of an audience of over-tanned, mouth-breathing dudes.

        It’s true that most of a beginner’s gains are due to neural adaptations, but you need more contractile units to lift heavier weight, plain and simple. Contractile units, myofibers, are made out of protein. Training for strength leads to myofibrillar hypertrophy, increasing the size of your muscle fibers by way of radius, i.e., packing in more actin-myosin chains per unit cross-section. This will produce lean, dense, insanely strong and fast-firing muscles over time. Training for strength generally involves low volume, high-to-near-maximal intensity, as well as an emphasis on compound movements to train the body to function as a continuum rather than a sum of parts. And I have been doing this for the last two years on a largely paleo-style way of eating, including occasional IFs.

        Training for size generally involves strength-endurance style lifting, high volume as well as high intensity in isolation of separate muscle groups to “bring up” or “scale back” distinct sections towards an aesthetic end. Many bodybuilders “carb up” after their workouts to shuttle glycogen into their muscles. Glycogen brings along with a boatload of water as well (due to osmotic gradients). This leads to sarcoplasmic hypertrophy – the muscle bellies swell with excess fluid, leading to large, though largely non-functional, muscles.

        And this reflects in most people’s opinions of how bodybuilders look – “swollen,” “thick,” “bulging.” And what about those people who truly look like they are made out of muscle? “Intense,” “ripped,” and generally, “hot.” These are people who can kick some serious ass – MMA athletes, firefighters, special forces, mountain climbers, boxers, Pro-Am football receivers, and Victoria’s Secret models (I’m not kidding).

        Who would you rather look like?

      • Alex K on April 16, 2011 at 06:35


        Ok, how is being able to do more volume weak. If someone can do more volume at higher intensities, but might not be as 1 rep strong, that is not weak. It will build endurance and strength. Training with low volume for strength can lead to strength gains, but you will stagnate. Most likely due to singular plane of motion exercises done repetitively for low volume will always lead to joint problems and stagnation, not very functional muscle to me. Just practicing the compound movements for strength will only lead to future pain, remember strength is just one of the many cues for progress. Progress also involves speed, power, agility, and more volume done in the same amount of time. Yes, this is how MMA fighters, football players, all the people you listed train. Most of them require carbs to fuel their workouts and continue to make progress. As for the hypertrophy fibers, I don’t want to even argue that point here because you are uninformed about the whole process of hypertrophy. Just listen to your concept, “training for low rep strength will lead to fast firing muscles”? No, training for speed and volume will do this, if you only train slow, you and your muscle will be slow. So eating paleo(low carbs) and only strength training will lead to stagnation, and non functional muscle.


        Does this website not promote fasting, and IFing in general? Yes, it does. Which means when you work out fasted you are further hindering yourself of progress. Once again, progress is not just retaining strength during a workout. You are correct in that a very few small percentage of people who have been training correctly for many years do not need a great deal of volume to produce proper intensity. But me and you are not one of them, that is something your neuralsystem learns through high intensity endurance training for many years, not for the majority of people who just strength train.

      • Paul Verizzo on April 16, 2011 at 06:44

        If I understand you right – and that is a real challenge – I can only conclude you are, well, an idiot. Nothing you said makes real world sense, just a bunch of Nattering Nabob recycling of some ancient myths.

        Of course, as I said, “If I understand you right…..”

      • Michal on April 16, 2011 at 06:45

        “High protein diets are very metabollically expensive on your system.”

        I’ve heard this repeated ad nauseum but I have never seen any evidence of it. I am very curious as to whether a high protein content can really be a detriment. Does anyone have any references for this?

      • Alex K on April 16, 2011 at 07:14


        I am not sure about a detriment to your system, but high protein diets without adequate carbs is not a well usable energy source. Also once the nitrogen in protein is gone, all that nutrition people claim to be getting from excessive meat intake is worthless. Protein is worthless without it’s nitrogen content, that is what makes it special. Once your urine is yellow, and has a distinct odor to it you are urinating out all the excess nitrogen, making your urine quite expensive, compared to an adequate protein diet high in carbs.

      • Paul Verizzo on April 16, 2011 at 08:02

        AAAAARGH! Yet another Alex logical non sequitur! I repeat, you are an idiot.

        Urine turns yellow from free ascorbic acid or its metabolites, I’m not sure. Protein does not turn urine yellow.

        If the nitrogen is “gone,” the chemical is not loner a protein.

        I’ve eaten 300-400 grams of COMPLETE animal protein for weeks on end and have never had yellow urine or any other detrimental effects.

        Tell the Inuit and the Plains Indians that they carbs for their high protein diet, OK? You need to learn a) how to think logically, and b) some real science, not recycled vegan/vegetarian mythology.

      • Alex K on April 16, 2011 at 08:50


        I have tried fasted workouts before, doing crossfit exercises, and low volume strength training exercises. I thought I was training at high intensity and yaddda yaddda, I am a hardass because I can workout fasted and maintain strength, so I must be progressing. Wrong, at least for me, I can workout at a much faster pace with a high carb diet, which leads me to further progress in my workouts. Strength is not the end all be all to progression. I am glad you are getting stronger, and you should be because you are making newbie gains the first few years. This will stagnate, and you will soon realize in order to progress you will need to make strides in other areas. Just because you run sprints or do box jumps doesn’t mean you are training at your maximum intensity level. If you are happy at your current state, then I say keep it up. But in order to truly progress, or “free the animal”, you must make strides in other areas beside strength, which will most likely for most people require more than a low carb diet. Fasted training really means …what? If you are eating enough after your workouts, it is the same, timing of food means nothing if you can workout at a higher intensity fasted, which most people cannot do, which does not equal getting just stronger. Yet the correct macronutrients mean alot for maximum glycogen restorage. I am not arguing that you cannot train fasted, but is it optimal? Any smart athlete, would tell you no. If you are lifting weights are doing crossfit or whatever, you should consider yourself an athlete. Is all this necessary, of course not, but can you maintain a paleo lifestyle and continue to make hypertrophy gains and other progressions besides strength, doubtful without a higher carb intake.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 09:31

        “you are making newbie gains the first few years. This will stagnate”

        Yea, this is four years now people have been telling me that my gains are just “newbie.”

        It’s bullshit. The lions share of my gains have come in less than the last year.

        I think we come ver a very different set of goals as well. I’m not interested in “training” for training’s sake. I’m simply interested in decent strength and gene expression appropriate to a more wild and natural existence.

        And I’m interested in functional as well, simply for various skills of strength and moderate endurance.

        Not interested in the ability to run a marathon or bike a few hundred miles, or anything close to that. It’s a worthless waste of energy (and lean mass) in an evolutionary context.

      • Alex Thorn on April 16, 2011 at 10:07

        As others have already said – you seem to be spouting unsubstantiated nonsense!

        I’m not the least bit interested in my muscle glycogen levels, so don’t keep dragging me into your argument. I am able to do all the physical stuff I need to do so I trust my body keep levels where they are needed for me.

        I’m sorry but IF is not going to make much difference to glycogen levels – many people deliberately choose to work out in a fasted state and many of those report a very positive experience in terms of both performance and muscle growth.

      • TandooriChicken on April 16, 2011 at 10:45

        Okay Alex K,

        Many, many strength-endurance style trainees have no problem cranking out multiple reps on a given exercise, but will struggle to single even 110-120% of that weight. Is that what you consider strong?

        I never said anything about training slow. You’re just assuming that low-rep means slow. Near-maximal training forces you to accelerate the weight fast if you ever want to reach lockout. It requires maximal engagement of strong, fast-twitch muscle fibers, because engagement of slow-twitch fibers alone will not allow you to get the weight up. Guess what? This builds power as well as raw strength. Speed is a part of power, so naturally, this is built in this way of training as well. There is no counting or rep rhythm here. It is just get the weight up; or don’t.

        Yes, all of the people I listed above also do strength-endurance training, for precisely that purpose – strength endurance. But even in those movements, they focus on explosive lifting and comparatively low rep ranges, say, 6 – 12 for example. That’s because training like a bodybuilder, for size, doesn’t serve any of these people well. Excess non-functional mass and body volume just gets in the way and slows you down when you’re actually trying to get stuff done.

        Bodybuilders working in the high-volume rep ranges are no longer training strength or strength-endurance. They are trying to tear down as much muscle and deplete as much glycogen as possible before they fatigue, so that the body will pull in as much glucose and water as possible from the subsequent meal (overcompensation), and help build thick, full muscle bellies.

        Agility, mobility, and coordination come from doing agility, mobility, and coordination drills, not from more volume. If your answer to everything is more volume, how do you recover?

        I also challenge you to show me how a compound movement like a heavy clean and jerk is a slow, singular plane movement that will cause me joint pain.

        Your ideas are dated. Pick up any current exercise physiology text book sometime if you want to learn something. Or read anything by Charles Poliquin, Dave Tate, Chip Conrad, Christian Thibaudeau, or Joe DeFranco.

      • Alex K on April 16, 2011 at 12:09

        Agreed, our goals are different. I am just trying to show that what you advocate, compound lifts and low carb eating, will lead to stagnation, especially people interested in athletics and hypertrophy beyond newbie gains. Program design is a very precise thing, exercises are just tools in the toolbox, there are alot of tools you need to build a house. What Martin advocates is what you follow correct? IFing is a great tool, it’s also just a form of calorie restriction great for maintaining or losing weight, not optimal for hypertrophy and any strength endurance athletes. If you are interested in functional muscle, you should train for more than strength with compound movements(squat, deadlift, etc..), this can lead to back, knee, and tendonitis problems over time. Of course our definition of functional may also differ.

      • Jared on April 16, 2011 at 12:12

        IF is not a form of calorie restriction…. It’s clear you don’t know what you’re talking about from that one sentence alone.

      • Alex K on April 16, 2011 at 12:23


        My answer to everything is not more volume, but more volume does serve its place in a program, just like strength, agility, and speed training. Your ideas are the outdated ones, people are combining more functional training with strength training today more than ever, because it works. The olympic lifts are great tools served within a program, but if this is all you do consistently you will stagnate, or most likely cause tendonitis or injury somewhere. Most olympic lifts occur in the sagittal plane of motion, especially only using an olympic bar. You need all forms of training to progress, look at the SAID principle. I don’t know about the muscle belly stuff you keep talking about, last time I checked people have over 600 muscles throughout there bodies, all which can benefit from a higher carb diet.

      • Alex K on April 16, 2011 at 12:29

        Of course it can be, but if you overeat your calorie expenditure in just two meals you will gain weight. Martin uses it to “shred his clients”, which is calorie restriction. Or I guess you could eat a boatload of food in one or two meals and maintain homeostasis, but this most likely would cause digestion problems, who would want to do that. I will stick to just three squares a day, and four if I have a dessert.

      • Bob Connors on April 16, 2011 at 12:29

        My God, for the love of Pete already. Alex K- do you remember how idiotic DurianRider sounded during his debate? You’re approaching that level here.

      • TandooriChicken on April 16, 2011 at 15:32

        Ah Alex K,

        I think I may have found partially the reason for your confusion. You think we eat no carbs at all. We’re paleo, not low-carb. Our diets are incidentally lower in carb than SAD, but that’s just on account of the type of food we eat.

        Here I am eating my post-workout meal of cultured coconut milk, dried mango slices and buffalo jerky. I eat to feed my activity. That means (A) a small amount of carbs to replenish the glycogen I’ve burned plus bump insulin levels a bit in order to (B) make my muscle cells more receptive to protein. The coconut milk is…. well…. it just tastes good. If I’m not going to be training on a given day, then I won’t eat many carbs that day. There’s no reason to ride the insulin roller coaster unnecessarily.

        Romanian deadlifts, step-ups, Bradfords, pull-downs, close-grip bench, reverse curls, all heavy and reps 3 or less…. except for the last set to failure in each. Followed by a moderate-paced 2 mile walk home in the bright San Diego sun.

      • Sue on April 17, 2011 at 05:10

        Jared it can be used for calorie restriction.

      • Alex Thorn on April 16, 2011 at 00:44

        I was not referring to myself but to the findings of a scientific study that looked at how much muscle glycogen was used during an INTENSE – yes, intense – weight-training session. It was only around a third – you do not completely drain your muscle glycogen reserves. In experimental studies, when they want subjects to be glycogen depleted, they have to put them on at fast of at least 12 hours and then give them a lengthy AEROBIC or ENDURANCE workout to exhaust their glycogen. If you are training at the proper intensity you do not need a great deal of volume or duration in order to stress the muscles sufficiently to elicit an adaptive response.

        I suggest you look at some basic physiology books and look at the latest peer-reviewed scientific studies.

      • Paul Verizzo on April 16, 2011 at 08:08

        I’ll give you this one, Alex. I do isometric to failure weight training. Also conventional multi-rep, but also to failure. I doubt if my glycogen is depleted like when I push really hard on my bike for many minutes. No evidence, just a hunch.

        OTOH, it is well established that a high carbohydrate consumption packs a LOT more glycogen into the liver and muscles, the concept of carb loading made real. One of the several reasons that going low carb results in immediate loss of “water weight” is a rebalancing of that glyogen to more normal levels.

        BTW, I started the weight training after last summer’s bicycling and weight loss because I had lost a lot of muscle and strength. That’s what endurance athletics does, it eats your muscles because other than legs for cyclists, the arms, chest, back is wasted calories. I have gained almost 500% strength increase in some of my exercises and now my cycling speeds are shooting up. New PB’s by huge amounts.

        Eat meat.

      • Alex K on April 16, 2011 at 09:08


        What you did makes perfect sense, and so do your results. You trained one way endurance exercises(hoping higher carb diet for cycling) only for the summer. You then went back to strength training. This is referred to as the “slingshot effect”, your body progressed in other areas using other muscles, so when you went back to strength training your muscles worked better together, leading you to greater strength. This is what football players do every year, they play the game for part of the year, let’s call this agility and speed training, and then they strength train for another part of the year to further progress in other areas. Guess what, they do not eat low carb diets because it is not optimal for them.

      • Paul C on April 15, 2011 at 15:52

        You must have your head in the sand. You can find paleo athletes with large amounts of muscle without trying very hard. Bodybuilders, and even athletes for that matter, are not a model for the average person anyway. Also are you not paying attention, paleo is a framework that encompasses high carb as well.

      • Abe on April 15, 2011 at 17:08

        funny, that doesn’t work for a lot of people.

        here’s another side story: talk to any farmer. ask them what do you feed pigs (natural omnivores, very similar digestion to humans) to put on weight (ie… fat)? You know what they’ll tell you… corn and/or grains. Protein is for growing, mainly for muscle, grain is for building fat/weight.

      • TandooriChicken on April 15, 2011 at 18:49

        Just look up any of Shelby Starnes’ clients for low-carb natural bodybuilders. Of course there are carbs, but only after a training session, and generally only consisting of a sweet potato or rice.

        Protein makes my urine expensive? Hmm…. there is a potential business model here.

  51. james on April 15, 2011 at 13:05

    You know I really want to try my own “chimpanzee diet”. Eat bugs, nuts, and fruit for a while, just to see what happens. I’d still keep it relatively low carb, because I simply cannot handle sugar rushes and crashes anymore.

    Does anyone know of any providers of bugs for food? There used to be a childrens science and hobby store by my house that sold spiced bug treats. Then there’s also pet stores, but I think I’d run out of variety fast if I only hunted/gathered at the pet store.

    And lastly, cost effective? Y/N

    • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:34

      James, you might check with Ned Kock. I believe it is he at Health Correlator who has posted about how bugs solve any delema of sustainability.

    • christina_aurelius on April 15, 2011 at 13:38

      I was recently at a bar in Korea town (Los Angeles) that had bugs on the menu alongside the other meat appetizers. I’m a pussy and I didn’t eat them. However, perhaps some stores catering to cultures that still eat bugs could help you out?

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:46

        back in the 80s in Thailand I ate enormous deep fried locusts. Potato chips. Seriously, you would not tell the difference. Also, huge water beatles. You tear off the shell on the back, eat the meat. Shrimp.

      • Steve on April 15, 2011 at 23:01

        I lived in Thailand for 8 yrs. Closest I ever got to that was grasshoppers. I couldn’t bring myself to eat the bigger stuff.

        I’m reminded of a time I was staying in northern thailand during the rice planting season (really beautiful around that time btw). There was a swarm of some kind of thumb sized bug which I couldn’t identify. There were thousands of them all over the place.

        They covered the floor in the little 2 story house I was staying at. Well the Thais used a broom and swept the floor clean of them. It was only a little later that I realized they’d collected them and were cooking them in a pot.

        For my part I’m more of a chicken and som-tam kinda guy.

      • Johnnyv on April 17, 2011 at 14:56

        They generally taste like the oil they were cooked in so not great really.
        Give my pad kaprow gai or moo with a fried egg(kai dow) any day.

    • TandooriChicken on April 15, 2011 at 18:51

      The gal over at grows her own larvae for frying. You could probably get in touch with her about your experiment.

      • james on April 15, 2011 at 19:56

        thanks for the tips guys. Yeah I think I may have seen Ned Kock on the Colbert Report.

      • james on April 15, 2011 at 20:07

        Oh yeah, only insect I’ve eaten besides those spicy cockroach treats was a scorpion me and my buddy caught over in eastern WA. roasted it, tasted just like shrimp.

      • gallier2 on April 16, 2011 at 01:29

        Scorpions aren’t insects.

      • Erik on April 16, 2011 at 11:19

        Nutritionally speaking, close enough.

  52. Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 13:17

    The commie whining about having to pay for a download and transcript on that 30bad thread is worth it’s price in gold.

    • Jim mcbride on April 15, 2011 at 13:26

      He may of missed the live debate because he had to eat twice during that 90 minutes.

    • Dan on April 15, 2011 at 13:32

      “I spent all my money on dates and lettuce. How can anyone expect me to have 15 dollars when I follow the healthiest lifestyle ever?”
      Something like that…..

  53. Danny B on April 15, 2011 at 13:38

    Well, Durianrider is obviously just pathetic. You challenged robb to your own little contest in which anyone who is 40lbs underweight would do well in. Why didn’t you challenge him to a kickboxing bout, or try to see who can deadlift, back squat, and bench the most. Let me answer for u. U know that if you kickboxed you would just quit, like in that video of chasing down a kangaroo you pussy. And the lifting you would never do because you would only total maybe 400lbs, which robb at one point could do in one lift.

    • Paul C on April 16, 2011 at 08:26

      From my experience in the power output crowd, I think Harley would only be able to put out 25% to 40% of Rob’s output, even taking body weight into consideration.

  54. Darya on April 15, 2011 at 13:40

    I think your tactic of being inclusive was perfect, and you did much better than he did. His arguments were so circular and his “facts” so inaccurate, it was hard to listen to. I can’t imagine what it must have felt like arguing live with someone who’s doesn’t use linear logic. Kind of like arguing with a child.

    His vitamin B12 argument was particularly confusing, “meat eaters can be B12 deficient too!” What the hell has that to do with anything? The poor health of people on Western diets doesn’t change the fact that vegans need supplements to get adequate nutrition. Scientific thinking clearly plays no part in his nutrition dogma.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 14:02

      Thank you, Daria, buddy (without the other part :).

      Hey everyone, I am really getting a kick out of Darya’s weekly live video podcast (you can engage in live video, or text). She’s a PhD in neurobiology like Stephan (I wanted to set them up, but she’s already in love), she’s adorble and a real food foodie.

      She is also evolving, as I’ve been following for a while. That is to say, she is keenly coming to see what the real debate is about and that meat must be defended, nutritionally.

      • Darya on April 15, 2011 at 14:49

        My dream is one day you will spell my name right ;)

        Thank you for the kind words. And that reminds me, we gotta get you on the show.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 15:11

        “My dream is one day you will spell my name right”

        Let this be a lesson to all you 50 something out there of how to keep a hot 20 something engaged. :)


        Sorry, Darya. What’s funny is I think the name is cool.

      • Michael on April 15, 2011 at 15:17

        Funny. I spelled her name wrong the first time I mentioned her on my blog (last name). :-)

        And isn’t Darya at least 30? ;-)

      • Darya on April 15, 2011 at 15:18

        31! And in the best shape of my life :)

      • Michael on April 15, 2011 at 15:38

        And in the best shape of my life

        I believe it! :P You certainly don’t have to convince me. :-)

      • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 16:30

        “31! And in the best shape of my life.”

        Indeed you are, Darya. And you’ll keep it up, too. 20 years from now, you will really begin to cash in on your investment of real foodism in a way that will separate you from the dumb lucky. I don’t have to tell you that, of course, just echoing what you yourself would say.

        But others already in advanced 30s and 40 or even higher should not despair. This was long before we began tweeting Darya, and everyone knows about my transformation, but here’s my wife Beatrice, of Mexican descent (I’ve all my life gone for the brown skins — Philippines, Thailand, S Amwerica, etc.).

      • Darya on April 16, 2011 at 09:08

        She is beautiful! Reminds me of my mom actually, who is also Mexican. #hotlatinasFTW

      • Christina on April 17, 2011 at 14:08

        I love your wife’s sassy haircut. I hope I look that good when I am 50!

  55. Jo on April 15, 2011 at 13:43

    Just wanted to make a note on my previous post, in the youtube video i linked (Sugar : The Bitter Truth) , the diagram showing that Americans are consuming LESS calories from fat is at the 9:35 mark if anyone should be interested in watching that bit.

  56. Jared on April 15, 2011 at 13:49

    I thought the debate went well.

    I don’t know if it would have helped but some of durinerider’s more asinine lies went without rebuttal or recognition that they were lies. Personally, I would find it hard to debate this guy because I’d want to go sentence by sentence and stop him everything he says, and say bullshit bullshit bullshit.

    It’s like he strings so many ridiculous sentences together it becomes an incredible feat to keep track of where the crazy is going, or what the most important thing to counter is…

    • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 14:15

      I’m glad you brought this up, Jared.

      This why the wouldacouldashoulda. Or, it’s an endeavor of a thousand regrets, if you focus on that. I really can’t tell you what it’s like because it is so far removed from a written debate where you have as much time as toy want to reference, draft, edit.

      Initially, I was trying to handle everything, so on the first two questions I just gave a laundry list, kinda in bullets. They I changed tacktic and went for the one or two things I thought most important. Like in the China Sudy part. It’s difficult because you have to at once be taking notes, keep listening, and think about how you are going to present a rebuttal.

      Way different from any experience I’ve ever had, but I just kept my head down and determined to stay on my point no matter what was said. No way to confer everything as it was a barrage from start to finish.

      The bright side is that you now know absolutely every single thing Harley knows ( or thinks he knows ).

      • Michael on April 15, 2011 at 14:57

        It’s difficult because you have to at once be taking notes, keep listening, and think about how you are going to present a rebuttal.

        Yeah it is but once you master this it really helps with written debate.

        When I was a competitive debater in college this is what really annoyed my about the one on one or tag team debate formats. They were scoring the debate and you had to answer every point your opponent made or he/she would win that point by default. So of course you had folks come along and start listing off points auctioneer style figuring they could win just by the sheer weight of numbers.

        My first debate when my turn came around I just put my pencil down and said I had no response. I couldn’t keep up. But I got the hang of it and by the time the debate season ended I was the unquestioned champion Lincoln/Douglass debater in the Northwest and brought home some serious hardware for my university.

        I also started asking for citations for each point when someone made a “50 points in 10 minutes” kind of presentation. 99% of the time they didn’t have one, so they lost that point by default. Then I would make a substantive argument with 2 or 3 points which forced the debate to be narrowly focused.

        I enjoyed it. It was a lot of fun. I was the contrarian.

        I wore a suit and tie when everyone else dressed casually. I laughed, joked and smiled all the way through. I wandered away from the podium (we stood in one on one debate/sat during tag team), interacted with the audience, looked my opponent dead in eye and leaned in his direction when I knew I was making a powerful point, and otherwise enjoyed joyfully skewering inadequately prepared folks.

        But the most important lesson was learning to put myself in the other guy’s shoes during the prep phrase and asking, “how would he answer this objection” and “what is about his position that causes him to think this way?” And then role playing this out with fellow teammates.

        It taught me a lot about the weaknesses in my own position and believe it or not made me more sympathetic to where my opponents were coming from.

        I couldn’t listen to it last night as I have no internet after 7:00 pm EST, but I’m going to buy it. I’m looking forward to it although I really can’t stand listening to people who don’t have the ability to make an argument in a linear fashion. So I truly hope that is not the case with Harley

      • TandooriChicken on April 15, 2011 at 19:06

        Michael, I don’t think Harley has the ability to make a substantive argument period. I have yet to listen to the debate myself (got some free time tomorrow set aside for that), but judging from the comments here as well as over at the 30BaD thread it seemed like a whole lot of repetition, circular logic, begging the question, and shotgun ad hominems. Good luck with that.

    • Jamie G. on April 15, 2011 at 17:23

      Google “fractal wrongness”… that about covers it.

      • Michael on April 15, 2011 at 18:30

        Hmmm…a tar baby. Time to pull out my old post on how to avoid those on the web.

  57. Lute Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 14:14

    Well, judging by what I heard last night and by the vast majority of comments, Durianrider is pathetic. Great job Richard.

  58. Alex Good on April 15, 2011 at 15:19

    I expected you to be the one throwing insults (and a few f-bombs), but bananabrain was the one doing it.
    Good job on the debate, and tell durian that he’s more of a “mad cow” than Sally Fallon.

  59. Erin (Primalvore) on April 15, 2011 at 16:31

    Die-hard Paleo chick here, but I must admit that I do follow a good amount of Vegan Food Blogs because I like the desserts, the sauces, and the aesthetic :o). I get a lot out of some Vegan blogs – I never thought I would be able to live without dairy, and some of the top bloggers out there have really excellent recipes that are great – that being said, I’m talking about blogs that also embrace using fats like coconut oil and coconut milk. And I like the whole meditation/yoga vibe that is common throughout Vegan blogs. I digress.

    What weirds me out about this whole debate last night is that I honestly do think that Vegans have a strong argument as to why they eat how they do, and it is just as valid as our Paleo views of why we eat the way we do. Maltreatment of animals is the core of most every Vegan’s lifestyle choice – it’s not that they “don’t like the taste of meat”. But instead of addressing that eloquently, Durianrider made these flighty, wacked out responses about smashing the heads of chickens and goats and tearing into the flesh of live kittens and “sucking the teats” of cows. It was laughable. It wasn’t even…a debate, really, IMHO. Richard, I don’t know how you (or the moderator, for that matter) weren’t just like “….ooooo….kkkkk…..” everytime he spoke.

    I’d be interested in hearing this debate from the viewpoint of a Vegan who eats a good amount of fat. Though I will say….I know a lot of people have brought up the issue that Durianrider is stretching the truth about certain things, but really – what is up with those pictures of Taubes and Cordain and Sally Fallon? I’m not an idiot, I’ve seen about a billion before-and-afters on Mark’s Daily Apple and know that some people have gotten really lean with this diet, but it does make me question what’s going on with those mentioned!

    • rob on April 15, 2011 at 17:12

      Damn that is a lot of text.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 15, 2011 at 22:07


      Some good points. When I was at MovNat this summer lunch was raw vegan every spday, with recipes off blogs such as you speak of and while I’d have probably prefered a hunk of meat I was pleasantly surprised, especially since I tend to eat twice a day anyway. We were active, so it was a pretty good balance, eating three times but with the middle meal low density. The real reason for doing that, incidentally was just the logistics of having to cook and clean three time per day instead of twice.

      That pic of Taubes is over four years old and has been around with the same annotation for as long. He is WAY leaner now.

      Fallon is WAPF and she’s a huge fan of raw milk. I like a bit myself, but only intermittently and even then, no more than an 8oz cup or two per day. Milk will make you fat if you drink a lot of it. That’s its biological function.

    • Michael on April 16, 2011 at 08:56

      Die-hard Paleo chick here, but I must admit that I do follow a good amount of Vegan Food Blogs because I like the desserts, the sauces, and the aesthetic).

      Hey Erin,

      If you happen to read this could you shoot me an email with the blogs you follow? It would be greatly appreciated.


  60. Paul C on April 15, 2011 at 16:44

    That 30bad thread is very worth reading. Now someone posted a graphic of the amount of fruit it would take to match the nutrition of 4 oz of beef liver. Am I reading that right? 2250g (almost 5lb of fruit) to match 113g of liver. And he or she called this amount of fruit his/her breakfast.

    In another thread about reduced libido, a guy said fruit made his penis bigger. And he was serious.

    30bad is a rich source of Vitamin LOL.

    • TandooriChicken on April 15, 2011 at 19:44

      I’m going to venture out on a limb (pun in the making?) and wonder if he just duct taped a large banana to his crotch. I’ll leave it to someone else to actually imagine that. You can thank me for the visual =P

    • TJ on April 16, 2011 at 00:01

      It’s amazing what a banana and some duct tape can do for one’s manhood…

      • TJ on April 16, 2011 at 01:33

        Oops…that’s what you get for ruhing and not reading the replies…

    • christina_aurelius on April 16, 2011 at 09:47

      With that amount of fruit being consumed on a regular basis I imagine the LFRV diet also includes a lot of Vitamin D as in “Diarrhea.” If I consumed that much fruit I bet I’d be thin as hell too from the laxative effect the food would have on my colon. Sheesh.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 10:28

      Thanks Paul C. This is worth a post on. Working up now.

      Now, can you guess the big flaw here? It’s an 850 kcal breakfast of fruit vs 150 kcal of liver in isolation. Just wait until I add a couple of eggs, sweet potato and some fruit to get to total kcal equal at 850. Then, I’ll even switch out the 4oz of liver for 4oz of sirloin and it will still blow the fruit meal out of the water.

  61. Rob on April 15, 2011 at 17:11

    I’m sorry I missed the debate. Sounds like Bananaman is all heat and no light. Not surprising seeing as how he treats people on his YouTube page who dare disagree with his High Banananess.

  62. Jamie G. on April 15, 2011 at 18:02

    Talk is cheap… BUT, if you would have told me that it would have been Thursday night at the Thunder Dome where I could have watched a smoothie drinking, tofu eating, cycle riding vegan take on a loin cloth wearing, spear chucking, Vibram wearing paleo dude, no holds barred, fight to the death… well, I would have paid for ring side seating.

  63. TJ on April 16, 2011 at 01:38

    Richard, according to FreeLee, Dunston is making money from the debate:

    “see it as a donation Lindsay. Harley makes a couple of bucks off each sale [of the transcripts]. Just think of all the things people have given you for free in your life (or helped you in some way) and see if you still come out on top. :) I don’t know anyone who gives away as much free info as Harley does”


    Why aren’t you? I know you don’t need the money, but it would be sweet to think that you got part of a vegan’s unemployment check and spent it on grass-fed ribeyes…

    • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 07:07


      It was an after the fact offering from Steve on the mp3 sales. Half to him as promoter and 25% to each of us. As of yesterday afternoon sales were at about $300, so 150/75/75 but Steve does not yet have his costs covered and I told him that until he does I won’t accept a penny and then in any case, I don’t want more “profit” from it than he gets.

      It’s just a token anyway, but that’s just how I roll.

  64. Gene on April 16, 2011 at 02:21

    I found it easier to turn off the stream instead of listening to durianrider’s crap. I actually wanted to learn about his point of view, but when he started talking shit about Robb Wolk & others, I just turned it off and went to cook dinner.

    He’s not worth my time. And I don’t believe Richard should have given him (or his blog) the attention.

    I am looking forward to the write-up however.

  65. Jon W on April 16, 2011 at 02:33

    Can I interupt this broadcast to ask a question about bone broth Richard. I’m trying to make bone broth for the first time and have read your post on it. I can’t comment on that post so am doing it here. I hope you can help a cooking gumby.

    I’m using a crock pot but after 6 hours on low I haven’t seen any evaporation. I’m wondering whether you have the lid off because you said “add water as it evaporates”? I have had the lid on.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 07:11

      John W, you keep it covered but you want to run it for at least 24 hours and I have gone as long as 48. You’ll get evaporation via vapor escape past the lid.

  66. Luca on April 16, 2011 at 16:57

    I was checking out 30 naners and found this gem. A 60 year old 80/ 10/ 10 fruit eater who looks older than that , sounds like she is about to fall asleep as she is speaking about how much energy she has. Looking at some of her other vids she is a total nutcase, which I am starting to see most of these people are.

    I don’t know if the diet attracts extreme people already or if they are just losing it from being on the diet. Maybe 80 10 makes you look 80 and sound like a 10 year old. Anyway, it is totally worth watching for a great laugh. Here is the link. Look at all her energy and radiance!!

    • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 17:27

      I couldn’t get any farther than “I’m higher than a kite.”

      • Tomas on April 17, 2011 at 08:27

        Is she (he? seriously, if it we not for her voice I couldn’t tell) reading everything from the screen?
        It’s like someone reciting a confession of beliefe after a week long fast.

    • Josh on April 17, 2011 at 08:39

      That’s seriously depressing.

  67. jenny on April 16, 2011 at 07:20

    i haven’t listened to the debate and don’t plan on it for the simple reason that, having been a vegan, i KNOW what harley is going to say. the arguments are emotional and dogmatically removed from reality.

    you can not be a vegan and at some point not become militant about it if you want to continue: militant and deluded. it is also inherently an isolating method of eating and vegans will tend to flock together into tight cultish groups to maintain. apart from being a pathetic (that’s right…i said it) mode of living, it REALLY fucks with your brain function. i’ve NEVER met a long time vegan who was truly happy and content. the brain is starving. my mental health was never worse than when i was vegan….

    apparently, from the comments, both from others and harley himself, harley seems to be quite the douchebag. i’ll give him a little bit of compassion because his diet may be somewhat responsible.

    also, every single vegan argument can be dismantled…the poor animals one, too. firstly, we are also animals and this child abuse that vegans put onto their own children is criminal, far worse than factory farms although in essence it is the same: feeding a creature a diet that is counter to its health. also, dropping your insistence that animals be treated well in life by just not eating them anymore is cowardly and irresponsible. instead use your rage to help create a society in which animals are free range, cage free, grass fed and appropriately given death.

    • Christina on April 16, 2011 at 15:50

      Ah! Yay! Another former vegan! Jenny, I was surprised from the debate because I assumed he would pull the same vegan arguments that I used to use with meat-eaters. Actually, he didn’t! He seems so uneducated even in his own philosophies that I think I could have argued in favor of veganism better than he did. Seriously. If I were a raw vegan eating a low-fat diet, like he does, I would be ashamed to be associated with someone who lacked so much knowledge in the reasons many choose to be vegan or the so-called science behind it. There are plenty of other raw foodists out there with books that Harley clearly needs to read.

      PS- I bookmarked your blog =)

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 15:54

        Christina, Jenny? Former vegans.

        You were never really vegans. See, once saved, always saved, so this just proves you were never saved in the first place. #notvegan :)

      • Brian Scott on April 16, 2011 at 17:06

        Ah, the “Calvanist lite” veganism. Always a good specimen of poor argumentation.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 17:33


        Was actually thinking more along the lines of circular. But that’s Calvinism too, in full fruition (I have an irresistible urge to use fruit based language, for some reason).

      • Christina on April 17, 2011 at 14:11

        *sigh* I guess not! Know what? I don’t give a shit at all =) It’s nice to be free of labels based on my diet.

  68. Tomasz R. on April 16, 2011 at 07:50

    The surprising winner of this debate is the idea of eating moderate amounts of fruit. Harvey advertised eating fruits quite well, Richard didn’t oppose the idea, and it’s compatible with listeners preexisting wistom – so the end result may be some people will start eating one fruit a day.
    The extremist versions of plant eating, known as veganism and fruitarianism was left alone undefended, as Harvey spent time advertising himself and smearing people who were not present at the debate, while Richard pointed quite well the associated dangers.
    The big win for Richard in resetting vegan mindset was presenting them the concept of diet that has healt benefits, is natural (not junk), compatible with our instincts and our prehistory, while it’s not tied to any particular ideology, is not fundamentalist, overly restrictive or controlling etc. This may be big for some of them. Perhaps they were used to all-alowing junk food diet, went restrictive vegan and saw health benefits? Or even participated in some clinically-controlled diets like Ornish one. Or were on traditional low-calorie diet. This may create them a false impression that health improvement is related to some severe restrictions, sacrificing what your instincts tell you or being controlled by “authorities” who decide what they should eat. So this was a powerful message.
    Harvey had some good moments, eg. mentioning sucesses of some approaches like Ornish diet, and the fact that some plant-based diet can cure diabetes, got some arguments against meat etc. But whenever he got a good start then he catastrophically failed to stay on course, quickly abadoned good arguments and went on attack mode, or some slogan chanting mode, catch-words generating mode or introduced this overexcited high-pitched voice self-dialogues (sugar high?). I had no idea that by default he talks in advertisment-like language! I thought that he normally speaks in more literary language than in his videos, that these videos were intentionally skewed toward advert-style to get some people eat his diet. I’m not sure if it was Australian language, or the fact that I’m not a native English speaker or something else – but I failed to get meaning of many his sentences, even while understanding almost all words.
    On the other hand Richard was consistent, persistent, metodical and stayed on course. The style of slow, information containing speach, spoken with low voice has a convincing property, while making people quite asleep. There was too little jaw-dropping arguments, “wow” moments, and spectacular enlightnments in what Richard said. He also needs to introduce some elements that make listeners imagining and jumpstart their thinking. Eg. asking rethorical questions to the audience eg. “Would you start eating animal products if you were found protein deficient?”, “Why is it that all biology books call humans omnivores?”, rather than just making statements in present tense. Or something like “imagine you are in Ice-Age Europe, and it’s winter. There’s a heavy snow cover, no plants are available, but there are all those large mammals moving around. What would your diet be in such conditions?”, or make them imagine something else. The key is not to let them be passive listeners.
    A funny thing is that I have realized that if not for the killing of animals Harvey wouldn’t be here today! He looks like he has Northern European ancestry, and this means his predecessors wouldn’t be able to survive low temperatures without animal, and survive winter without animal meat before agriculture with it’s long term grain storage was introduced.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 08:27

      Excellent, fair, valid critique of my performance, Tamasz. I agree with you on every point. Thank you.

  69. Christina on April 16, 2011 at 22:40

    Another video from the same woman, a follower of he-who-shall-not-be-named.

    I think this one is better. Mostly because she talks about super-athleticism, high-tech and “unheard of performance” all while looking like she is suffering from some sort of disease (which she may be and I am NOT mocking her for this, promise.) Other words and topics: destiny, “greasy trip,” RunningRock, “this is for the elite,” “like running straight up a mountain for 8 miles,” stable mentality, PSYCHIC SCREAM and abandonment issues. I swear to god, this makes no sense at all. It’s like my 4 yr old niece babbling about her toys but, instead, it is a grown ass woman talking about fulfilling her destiny through eating a lot of bananas.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 23:00

      Christina, ir truly strikes of someone in a rather catatonic state reciting catechism. Note the use of slogans, bromides, buzz words, key phrases.

      Reminds of reading the Illiad.

      • Asclepius on April 17, 2011 at 03:30

        I thought that was a trailer for ‘Evil Dead III’!

        She seems to exhibit a psychological disorder. I wonder if she is getting enough O3? Can’t believe she name checks Fruit-Douche himself. It would seem to explain a lot.

      • Jim Arkus on April 17, 2011 at 05:54

        Not to be a jerk and pick on her, but I used to know a guy in Hamilton who talked exactly like that. But he was a former heroin addict. Just saying.

      • christina_aurelius on April 17, 2011 at 14:48

        “Fruit-Douche.” Tee hee.

    • Arlo on April 16, 2011 at 23:05

      I feel sad now. :( This is mental illness.

      • Joseph on April 17, 2011 at 05:56

        I do think there is something deeper than mere charlatanism going on behind the scenes with Harley and many others in the LFRV fruitarian crowd. I am not comfortable making too much fun of them: they are too earnest and too broken (many of them having a long history of some kind of substance abuse). Dr. Harris’ simile comparing the debate to a war between babies and Marines was a little too true, I think.

        I sincerely wish them well, on their own terms even (though I think they might be possibly happier if their attitude toward animal products was more like my attitude toward fruit, which I have never avoided). I think it is important to respect them as people with the right to make their own decisions, even as we work to keep the young and naive among us from mistaking those decisions for the word of a some kind of god.

      • christina_aurelius on April 17, 2011 at 14:56

        I wish them well, too.

        I know that not every person that eats a raw food diet is represented properly by you-know-who. I have known many people who dabbled in raw food, or were totally into it, and they were, for the most part, genuinely convinced that the diet was their key to vibrant health. I can’t even diss them since I was vegan for such a long time even though it did nothing positive for my health regardless of the approach I took! I was just as fooled by the literature out there in favor of a vegan diet and to this day I still battle those notions. I STILL have to explain to the vegan demon in my head that it is ok for me to eat eggs for breakfast while shunning the bran muffins or fruit. It has been hard to let go of an ideology that has, for over a decade, defined me as a person. I really hope that the people eating these low-fat raw vegan diets begin to read the literature from other camps because right now they seem to only know their own side. Once can’t make an important decision about food based on one side of the story! Good luck, weirdo lady, with all the bananas!

    • Fartsy on April 17, 2011 at 06:31

      These people really do act like they are under some cult like influence. They believe any fake facts Harley spews out from him being an elite athlete to you can thrive on only fruit. You question them or give them the straight facts and they stick to what their cult leader DR tells them is correct even with no evidence to back it up.

      I’d like to see Har Har try and spend a winter in a cold climate and see how he fairs. After a long day in temperatures below freezing, walking home in a foot of snow, if he would find it more satisfying to come home to the wonderful smell of a roast cooking or a nice cold watermelon?

  70. Bob Connors on April 16, 2011 at 09:23

    Wow, it’s really fun poking around on the 30bad site. This from the thread, “Fruit is making me too fat!”

    Freelee, I don’t get why some on our site are gaining weight eating fruit only. Some even 30 pounds from 120-150. This is scary to some of us. Why is this? Why would they gain fat from 811? I love my fruit diet but don’t eat a ton for fear of gains. I run as you know 9 miles or more a day training for marathons but mostly eat close to 2500-3000 calories. I am 5’3″ and 110 47 years old and mommy of 4.

  71. Alex on April 16, 2011 at 09:41

    I listen to the debate vie web stream, and will only comment on the debate no other comments.
    As someone that has tried , mostly tried to eat healthy , tried vegetarian , even raw vegan. But ultimately settled for whatever I can get thats no super processed Plants and animals not powders and supplements.

    Arguments :
    DurianRider had very childish , infantile arguments , with pedantic made up stupid people he has to explain these common sense things too. I think the question of keeping animals as companionship is a cultural question not a nutrition one.

    Richard had more analytical , comparative arguments that I found more useful.

    The 30BAD people seem to accept that grains/ highly processed foods are bad news , but vindication of meat and fat as agents of disease doesn’t fit there world view so they keep it in spite of the new grain hypothesis so they are left with there food of choice FRUIT as the healthiest thing.

    Free the animal style “paleo” is not saying only eat 100% protein at every meal it’s not even low carb.

    I don’t think you can really argue about eating fruit as a treat its seriously delicious when your not dulled my chemical sugar snacks, but as a staple if you read any fruit history Its a very rare occurrence and reserved for only the rich and affluent. Trees do no like to grow orchard style(they do because we are smart and can trick them), they like to disperse , and have wind and insects pollinate them , modern fruit production(monoculture of clones +disease and close proximity) nearly made the banana an extinct species.
    Before drugs and refined sugar fruit was the stuff everyone coveted especial children . I got the grapes buddy hand over the gold. Also a lot of the traditional fruits like apples were reserved for making alcohol there was a time when growing apple trees in your back yard was the equivalent of have a small plot of Cannabis minus the legal status.

    And the manpower and fossile fuel needed to grow harvest ship and store the fruit.

    If you read “botany of desire” maybe mutant Soy ,Corn and Wheat are using human intelligence to take over the world.

    So in conclusion raw frutitarian diets are childish in essence and impractical in practice.
    A diet that respects your own sense of right and wrong, human physiology , evolution , geography , anthropology, nature , sustainably , adult knowledge, culture and the beauty of all living things is where its at regardless of what you specifically eat.

  72. perkinskit on April 16, 2011 at 09:47

    I just linked here from another post (

    Apologies if that leads to a track/pingback post here.

  73. Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 13:46

    Hey, here’s a challenge to the “elite athlete.”

    Lets see a video of you squatting in your first lift, 160# or better and then in a second, 187# or better.

    Better, because that’s what this 88# 9-yr-old girl can do.

    • Terry on April 16, 2011 at 19:24

      Those squats where TERRIBLE – and the use of the squat suit adds considerably to the amount of weight able to be used.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 19:43

        Terry, just tell us the truth.

        You’re a pathetic little pre-pubescent pussy, aren’t you? I mean, like in the context of an imaginary man.

        Come out to San Jose. I’d love to kick your ass for that. I’m serious, you waste of a fuck.

      • Terry on April 16, 2011 at 22:50

        Roid raging a bit?

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 23:08

        That’s all you have to say for yourself? Pathetic.

      • TandooriChicken on April 16, 2011 at 20:09

        What are you talking about? Form was better than average (esp for a 9-year-old) and she nailed those lifts. It looked like she could hit those raw, even if they might be grinders.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 16, 2011 at 22:38

        Imagine it. Some pussy of what passes for something with supposed male genitalia using ‘terrible’ to describe an 88lb, 9-yr-old girl squatimg from out of the hole for 160 and then a 187 world record.

        Do note the in his previous post he defended Dirianrider, because a link to his poor performance was before he began supplementing with B12.

        Now, put those two incidents together.

    • Kevin Hughes on April 17, 2011 at 10:15

      Be careful with that one Richard. I don’t see that much weight on the bar. Assuming the bar is 35 lbs. (ladies bar) those bumpers look like no more than 5 or 10 kg.’s each, plus a few smaller plates. I reckon maybe 90 lbs.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 17, 2011 at 10:36

        I thought the same thing, Kevin, and I don’t know whether that’s the video of the record-setting lift itself, but I did do a few minutes checking and in any case, the world record looks legit.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 17, 2011 at 10:42


        Official results.

        She also did a 193 DL.

      • Kevin Hughes on April 18, 2011 at 14:07

        Turns out it was an editing issue. They used the wrong segments in the video, but the record numbers are correct. Well done!

  74. Lisa on April 17, 2011 at 08:04

    I waited a bit to weigh in on the debate. I hooked up with “Feed” 3 weeks ago when I started my VLC diet. I think that despite all the hoopla, you did a great service to all the misinformed out there. Most people don’t understand any diet, let alone the specifics in either extreme. I believe you opened a lot of minds, while “30 bananas” showed just how unsustainable that diet actually is.

    Enjoyed the debate!

  75. Rip on April 17, 2011 at 13:17

    LEGEN-and I hope you’re not orthodox Paleo, because the second half of that word is-DARY!

    Seriously though, a debate with an uninformed lunatic like DR was always going to be like rolling up to a gunfight in an Abrams.

  76. SmackDown: Raw Vegan versus Paleo | Soil to Sustenance on April 17, 2011 at 13:31

    […] of the “low fat, raw, vegan” experiment attempted to debate Richard Nikoley (blogger at Free the Animal).  With facts and reasoning on his side, Richard clearly articulated the benefits of eating a […]

  77. John on April 17, 2011 at 16:24

    Who needs debate when 1. dealing with objective facts that 2. can be presented in song!

    (This makes me want to buy Maddox’s “for every animal you don’t eat, I’m going to eat 3” shirt)

    PSH B12? Its only a problem if you’re not pretending it isn’t!

    • Richard Nikoley on April 17, 2011 at 16:40


      Hilarious video.

      Just like preachers who use metre and rhyme, music suits to skirt real thinking.

  78. S.S. on April 18, 2011 at 08:19

    I have never posted a reply on any blog for any reason but being one of the 1000 people listening from my phone; I locked myself in my car, pulled out the charger and turned on the speaker and basked in the peace only to be found in a dark (started at 9pm where I was) lonely car and the bathroom (crude but true). It was very enjoyable.

    I imagine what I am about to say has been said by many others but here goes anyway.

    I believe you did a good job representing the paleo community. As with all things done in an impromptu manner, it’s difficult for me to judge as who knows if I would’ve done a similar job under the same circumstances. So, I will simply state what I was appreciative of.

    It was certainly appreciated that you never settled into over dramatized mocking of stereo types in order to get your point across, and if you did it happened so fast and subtle that it was not apparent to me.

    It was certainly appreciated that B12 wasn’t your single largest selling point on the nutritional merits of Paleo.

    It was appreciated that during the debate you did not hold your genetic structure up as being the prime example, one size fits all, of what all humans have and should be like. An endurance athlete is just that- an endurance athlete, with a slew of neurological pathways and muscle structure vastly different than that of a MMA fighter or power lifter. Each with divergent genetic influences over myological and ostelogical proportions (including muscle fiber types, bone density, and etc…). One diet or even a variation of a particular diet does not always work for everyone, specifically when trying to achieve a certain set of physical fitness goals.

    I am appreciative that you did not include individuals that had nothing to do with a particular eating lifestyle, and use them as an example against the eating style you were debating about.

    I am appreciative that you never brought up the dental condition of an individual as proof of a superior eating paradigm. Considering, there are many more factors that go into having a healthy set of chompers. Either way, given the circumstances of the debate, dental health was not proof of anything and was a clever diversion anecdotal in nature.

    I was appreciative of the websites quoted by the both of you. It was great food for thought.

    Mostly, I was appreciative that while you clearly stated your disagreement you never settled into mocking a the practitioners of the opposing viewpoint. Regardless of whatever factual data may or may not have been thrown about, no polite civilized intellectual argument is to be won by mocking the opponent or those who have similar beliefs. This one is a tad redundant, sorry.

    Anyways, good job. Keep up the fight. Paleo worked wonders for me and the results I have achieved from it have been absolutely astounding. I fight better, lift heavier, look better, last longer and can’t believe the changes it has brought about and it’s relatively easy too.

    • S.S. on April 18, 2011 at 08:21

      My first paragraph should have read:

      I have never posted a reply on any blog for any reason but having been one of the 1000 people listening from my phone, I now feel the need to post something. That evening I locked myself in my car, pulled out the charger and turned on the speaker and basked in the peace only to be found in a dark (started at 9pm where I was) lonely car and the bathroom (crude but true). It was very enjoyable.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 18, 2011 at 09:12

      Thanks. SS. I really appreciate all of that.

      • S.S. on April 18, 2011 at 09:53

        Oh the irony of the reply. Love it! =)

  79. Daria on April 18, 2011 at 13:55

    Just posted this on Durian’s site… looks like he still doesn’t get it (surprise, surprise). He probably won’t approve the comment, but if he does, it’d be nice if one rawvegan would see it and leave the dark side:

    – – – – –
    Wow, DR, all those guys got you pretty worked up! Let’s see if you have the guts to “approve” this comment, to clarify a lot of the incorrect things you wrote above:

    1st: The Paleo/Primal diet is quite different from SAD. The 3 main foods to be avoided in the Paleo diet are WHEAT (and all other beans/legumes), processed SUGARS (refine white sugar, HFCS, etc) and VEGETABLE OILS (corn, soy, cottonseed, etc). These foods take up the MAJORITY of the SAD diet (industrialized food), but they are completely lacking from a Paleo diet. That’s a huge difference, and well, I’m not surprised if you don’t see it because we know you aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed.

    By the way, all those unhealthy foods listed above (on the “Paleo avoid” list) are VEGAN foods. However, even rawvegans like yourself avoid them like the plague.

    Furthermore, you cannot say that everything Mark Sisson does is the definition of Paleo/Primal. Wouldn’t that be just like saying that everything David Wolfe or Anthony Anderson do are the definition of rawvegan? You throw a fit like a toddler when that happens, so don’t do the same damn thing yourself. Just because Mark Sisson sells supplements don’t mean that all Paleo/Primal people take supplements. Just because one Paleo eater will try some ice cream now and again doesn’t mean ice cream is part of the diet. Use your head, I think you can figure this one out.

    The idea of Paleo/Primal is to consume what the human body evolved to eat. This does not include supplements/protein powders. Most people I know in the community do not take any of those (except vitamin D, since we don’t get much sun up here).

    For the record: You were the only person who took supplements in the debate. Richard admitted that he is against the whole pill-popping-protein-powder thing, while YOU admitted that you need a B12 shot. So what do you have to say about supplements now, jackass?

    As far as intermittent fasting, you get it wrong once again (surprise). Let’s see if you can wrap your little, omega-3 starved brain against this one: “Starvation” is the deprivation of calories. “Caloric restriction” is also the depravation of calories. “Intermittent fasting” is NOT the depravation of calories, it is just a choice about WHEN you eat those calories. We ALL intermittent fast– for example, this happens when we SLEEP. No calories there!

    Lastly, there is very little industry involved for the most common practitioner of the Paleo diet (remember? no products of the industrial food system). Most people I know who follow this way of eating are also the biggest supporters of the local food movement, buy vegetable CSAs, etc.

    You’ve got nothing on Paleo, durian. Give it up.

    • Asclepius on April 19, 2011 at 04:29

      “The 3 main foods to be avoided in the Paleo diet are WHEAT (and all other beans/legumes), processed SUGARS (refine white sugar, HFCS, etc) and VEGETABLE OILS (corn, soy, cottonseed, etc)….By the way, all those unhealthy foods listed above (on the “Paleo avoid” list) are VEGAN foods. However, even rawvegans like yourself avoid them like the plague.”

      Daria, that is a GREAT line! I have to agree with Christina, it is unlikely Fruit-Douche will let that comment go through.

    • Zach on April 19, 2011 at 12:58

      He approved the comment. It would be good to head over there and shut him down. Using specific examples for a general nutritional concept is an interesting approach. Although he only holds himself up as the prime example of raw food veganism. It’s difficult to read because it is like arguing with a child.

      • Asclepius on April 19, 2011 at 13:24

        It is odd how Fruit-Douche usually exhibits extreme censorship and yet lets THIS particular comment through!

      • Richard Nikoley on April 19, 2011 at 14:00

        Zach and others. Suppose you wanted to get Harley and his hot babe to open up and not fear an onslaught.

        How would you go about it?

      • Fartsy on April 19, 2011 at 14:06

        I enjoyed the debate and have enjoyed the banter about it but I think it is time to end the Durianrider chat. He has gotten WAY more attention then he deserves. Posting to his site will change no opinions. When their diet fails they will have to find the path themselves. That is the road I believe we have all travelled.

        While I still enjoy posts about the fallacies and foibles of veganism can we please stop talking about Harley in particular? Like I said, he is not worth the effort

  80. christina_aurelius on April 18, 2011 at 16:15

    There is no WAY he is approving that comment and that sucks because it’s fucking awesome.

  81. christina_aurelius on April 19, 2011 at 10:02

    I wrote a little thing about my personal opinion on the debate. While I am not as well written as many of the blogs I read everyday, including this one, I thought I’d share the link. I was vegan for over a decade so my viewpoint is different than some others=)

  82. Tina on April 20, 2011 at 12:04

    Leading up to this debate, I was pondering the 30BAD diet. I decided a great experiment to was to try it. My plan was to try it for at least a week.
    Breakfast was cantaloupe – it was delicious, sweet and juicy. I enjoyed every delicious bite. Within an hour, I was starving hungry. So, I ate more fruit. Lather, rinse, repeat every stinking hour. I didn’t eat just cantaloupe, I had pineapple, apples, honeydew, bananas, etc. I was starving ALL DAY LONG. Every time I ate the fruit, I ate until I couldn’t stuff any more food into my poor straining belly. And within the hour, I was so hungry I couldn’t stand myself. I ended up eating some delicious meat and veggies for dinner and couldn’t stand to look at fruit for a week.

    • christina_aurelius on April 21, 2011 at 11:20

      Tina, this is how I felt when I, on numerous occasions, tried to eat a high-fruit diet while I was vegan. I was just fucking hungry all the time. I wasn’t even an active person so it isn’t like I needed 4k calories a day. I was constantly eating, constantly in the kitchen and I felt woozy all the time. I LOVE fruit, but it fits so much better as a treat in my diet than a staple.

  83. MightyAl on April 22, 2011 at 10:27

    I don’t know why I go over to 30bad and read the forum. All it does is drive me crazy. Harley quoted “FightClub” and the sheep told him how poetic and well spoken he was. I guess since they are all pacifists there isn’t a chance in hell that they would watch that type of violence so Fruitdouche can call it his own and noone would call him out for it. Sometimes people need to temper their fanaticism and come back to reality.

  84. […] “Diet” here means: way you eat.   Like Richard Nikoley put so well last week in his Raw Vegan Radio debate, “”Paleo” is not really a diet. Rather, it is a framework within which any […]

  85. Dualhammers on May 16, 2011 at 20:26

    I would like to point out that whereas here debate is open over on the 30BAD site they only allow in people who already agree with them. Makes it pretty easy for them to post up their own “lol richard is teh dumbs” post about the debate and just revel in their own superiority without any need to deal with honest inquiry.

    Also. How is somehow snidely deriding the nutrition content of 4oz of liver as “being not that hard to match” when they compare it to a breakfast of 5 POUNDS of fruit?

  86. […] Real Health Debate: Richard Nikoley debates paleo v. vegetarian with vegetarian advocates […]

  87. Mari-O in Bangkok on May 26, 2011 at 11:15

    To be scrupulously clear, Harley doesn’t always censor comments pre-emptively. He sometimes does so retroactively. It’s kind of fun to watch your comments appear and then slip into moderation purgatory.

    I worship Caveman Jesus as devoutly as anybody and I would walk through fire for Robb Wolf, as my errant comments that have made it onto the Durianrider site attest.

    That aside, there is something oddly charismatic about Harley. His message is repellent, distorted, dangerous and irresponsible. His animal liberation agenda renders him immune to science or logic. And he is a ruthless propagandist, which requires him to be shamelessly unfair to the point of outright immorality. But it takes all kinds and his perverse videos can occasionally arise to the level of a guilty, queasy pleasure. What is so compelling about Harley is that he experiences slivers of lucidity and manifests flashes of real expertise in certain areas — not to mention something that would appear to be genuine compassion of some kind. He is also so mindlessly and relentlessly and unyielding in everything he says and does that watching him rant can be sort of mesmerizing. (The most charitable word I can apply in nutshelling him: “unyielding.”)

    Like a good propagandist, he stays on his fairy tale message and never yields on any effing point. He never says “I said this but I meant that” or “So-and-so changed my view” or “I’m sorry about that.” The closest he comes is, “I”m sure [the person I’m about to tell a half-truth/outright lie about] is a nice guy, BUT [insert hideously misleading comment]. Debating a person like this with any hope of swaying him is a task fit for Sisyphus.

    For those of you who seek some common ground with Harley if only to restore your faith in humanity he does rail on David Wolfe quite a bit.

  88. Arta on September 1, 2011 at 08:45

    Ok, getting off the Harley bandwagon about his personality and his approach, tell me the fallacies in this:

    ESPECIALLY, the part when you pee out calcium after you eat meat.

  89. Arta on September 1, 2011 at 11:05

    Just to clarify, meat, after digestion, is acidic. Thus, when you eat it, the body needs to neutralize the hydrogen you just introduced, so it takes calcium phosphate from your bones. It uses the phosphate to neutralize the acid, and has no need for the excess calcium, so we pee it out. This is the reason why the two Inuit (not sure how to spell that) women found in ice, one in her 20s and the other in her 40s were both found to have advanced stages of osteoporosis and atherosclerosis. At that time, they mostly ate fish.

    • Alex on September 1, 2011 at 11:14

      Does Meat Really Leach Calcium from the Bones?

      Answer: Not according to the scientific evidence.

      • Richard Nikoley on September 1, 2011 at 12:52

        “Since HC Sherman first observed in 1920 that people who eat high-protein diets tend to excrete more calcium in their urine, over 25 trials have been published showing beyond a doubt that increasing dietary protein does in fact increase urinary calcium.

        “On the other hand there are at least four studies showing that people who eat the most protein have the slowest bone loss over time and another four showing that people who eat the most protein have the lowest fracture rate over time.

        “What we really care about, however, are the intervention trials, because these allow us to demonstrate cause and effect. While several of these have found modest benefits by providing protein-deficient elderly patients with small protein supplements, by far the most important intervention trial is that published by a group led by Bess Dawson-Hughes of Tufts University showing that protein intakes far beyond the minimal requirement actually improve bone health.

        “In this study, 16 older men and women were randomly allocated to a group made to increase their protein intake from 0.85 grams per kilogram of bodyweight, considered adequate, to 1.55 grams per kilogram of bodyweight. Another 16 people were randomly allocated to a control group and left their diet unchanged. After nine weeks, the group consuming extra protein had lower levels of bone turnover and higher bone mineral density.

        “The Dawson-Hughes group, contrary to many other studies, did not observe higher urinary calcium with higher protein intake. Studies conducted by Jane Kerstetter’s group at the University of Connecticut, however, showed that an even larger increase in dietary protein from 0.7 g/kg to 2.1 g/kg did, in fact increase urinary calcium, but not by leaching it from bone. Instead, they found that consuming more protein increased calcium absorption from the intestines. Markers of bone turnover tended to decrease on the high-protein diet but the decrease was not statistically significant. Kerstetter’s group is conducting ongoing investigations to determine the mechanism by which meat and protein enhance the intestinal absorption of calcium.

        “Does meat really leach calcium from the bones then? Not according to the scientific evidence.”

  90. Paul Verizzo on September 1, 2011 at 14:30

    Arta, meat after digestion is pre-poop, heading for the large intestine. It no longer exists as meat. Therefore, it cannot be acidic or alkaline. I presume you are dredging up that old horse pucky about acidic and alkaline foods, they change the blood pH. A favorite of the unscientific mindset.

    Succinct big picture response there, Richard.

    BTW, meat is fully digested be the time it exits the small intestine. Vegetable matter, OTOH, isn’t. That’s why it rots there, as the bacteria try to further break it down. One of the byproducts of that fermentation is gas.

  91. […] Johnstone — aka "Durianrider" — of the 30 Bananas a Day (30BAD) website and forum (posts here and here, with 327 and 452 comments, respectively). With all that activity and comments and debates and […]

  92. […] RSS ← The Real Health Debate: WouldaCouldaShoulda? Random Interaction With Readers: Progress, Reports, Misc. […]

  93. Pottypirate on December 27, 2011 at 05:12

    You guys may want to ask Harley how his brother in law went on his vegan diet???? After months of loosing strenght and feeling light headed and tired all the time he has introduced free range eggs and tuna back into his diet. And you wouldnt believe it but in 6 weeks he;’s back to his normal self. Harley won’t publish this anywhere as i feel it will be a little embarrasing for him. But he’ll just use the excuse he wasnt doing something right. And there are some comments on here about his girlfriend looking hot, i think you are looking at photos from a year ago, check out her latest ones, starting to look like her bitch (harley) Ha ha ha ha ha Durianrider your a bum who travels the world on donations from people you have brianwashed, you are a criminal and should be locked up along with your mentor Dr Campbell, for feeding society one of the biggest money making lies known to man!!! Top job Richard hats off to you for exposing this fraud. Dont worry guys, i don’t think he will be around forever. Once he fails and wakes up and looses everything, he will go back to the gutter where he came from. And yeah , Harley, i’ll be standing there ready to stick the boot in!!

  94. Colin on January 5, 2017 at 08:38

    Veganism is an eating disorder.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.