Paul Saladino· MD
the idea that eating animals is much more similar to human biochemistry and human processes than eating plants
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
the idea that eating animals is much more similar to human biochemistry and human processes than eating plants
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
our biochemistry is much more similar to that than it is to a Brassica vegetable you know to a mustard plant and so the way that that biochemistry works is just like ours you know we're going to get an animal the animals operating system I've also talked about this is is essentially equivalent to ours they're biochemical operating system the way they're built is very much like a human not entirely but it's very similar they're compatible but a plant operating system is completely different than a human and it often doesn't work well with human biology