Scientific proof that carnivorism corrupts the human body.

I think I have better things to do. I believe you've watched it through. Just tell us whether Dr Campbell has published his findings in a scientific magazine, and especially, has published it in a peer-reviewed scientific magazine. Without publishing his findings this way, his discovery would count nothing more than a story, rather than science, no matter what title he has - PhD or professor.

We have been eating meat since the species showed up, truth be told in small amounts as it should be, but eating it nonetheless....I don't correct nature at work for no stinking Vegan bullshit. I eat plenty of fish and vegetables so I am well aware meat should be consumed in moderate amounts...now when some PHD with a Vegan agenda shows up for this kind of total proibition nonsense all I can do its laugh at his dumb face for failing common sense. Plenty of diet studies in the past shown moderate consumption of meat is essential in a balanced diet.

One scientist. The vast majority of relevant scientists said global warming was a reality and still idiots didn't believe them. And more than one scientist, not a lot more admittedly, said global warming was a myth. You've invested one hell of a lot in the opinions of one scientist. Maybe he's like the handful of scientists who don't believe in global warming.

You are correct Izzy, it is healthy to be optimistic and skeptical about scientists and their ideas, I'm with you on that one.
But I have wikipedia search 82yr old Dr T. Colin Campbell to see if he's a genuine and honest individual, or if there are any loopholes or hidden agendas in his profile. So far I haven't found anything to nail him on. He seems like a very sincere and professional scientist. At 22yrs of age he got his Bachelor of Science in pre-veterinary medicine, at 24yrs of age he got his Master of Science degree in nutrition, biochemistry and at the age of 27 he got his Phd in biochemistry, nutrition and microbiology. In his career he's also done extensive biochemical scientific research with the American government and the United Nations. He has written best-selling books on biochemistry.
But you think I need to do more research on this guy? fair enough, it will be all internet based.
I always like to be 100percent sure about who I advocate.
I think health is a most important topic for us human beings. I don't think one can ever be too obsessive when it comes to well being, not these days anyway with all the unhealthy temptations and our lack of discipline. I'm definitely not a perfect example of good health by no means, but I try to be. I'm not getting any younger thats for sure.
But I guess its up to every person themselves to determine whether promoting better health is worth it for them or not...

My brother, then a PhD candidate in philosophy, used to respond to complaints from his sons that they were bored by saying that one of the great contradictions and conundrums in all the history of philosophy was whether one wanted a long but dull life, or a short but exciting life.

I'm thinking there isn't a lot of fun to be had at Amoh's house. I'm going to go make a bacon cheeseburger.

Regarding PhD, here is a view by a renowned neuroscientist:

Then what are your credentials to back up your statement? I thought so, "N" for nothing. A wannabe scientist.
You obviously haven't watched the video of Biochemist Dr Colin Campbell giving his testimony, his knowledge and long time expertise in this field.
You don't acquire a Phd from just sitting around twiddlng your thumbs. What sort of medication are you on?

I don't doubt your source is honest and sincere, but my point remains. He is just one person, scientific consensus is just that, consensus, not one person.

Yes you are correct in the context where people will be more interested if there is a vast consensus towards a scientific discovery.
But I consider myself an independent thinker when choosing preferences of this field. I wouldn't choose something just because Tom, Dick and Harry have chosen it.
I'd much rather choose something because I have checked it out myself...
But I know what you mean. Sometimes our fear can only be undermined when we see lots of other people giving it a try with sucessful results. Better to be safe than sorry as the fearful would say...
But its the first time I've ever come across a scientist who recommends a "plant only based diet." I always thought of it as a religious or airy-fairy idea. What a surprising revealation...

I really don't get your point here...why do you insist so much on this one opinion Amoh, what is the agenda ? Could you please address the fact that we have an omnivore dentition which of course is prepared to eat meat...what's the use of our canine teeth ? From your Christian pov was God drunk on the day he designed mankind ?

I concur with FA. To be honest with you I'm sick to death of all these scare stories appearing in the tabloids about our food killing us. Often they're contradictory. I'd rather enjoy my food instead of being miserable and worrying all the time.

I don't deny animal meats in the context of scarcity and survival. But if there is scientific proof of a better state of well-being in an environment of plenty, then I am all for it if it is possible for me to grasp...
God may have created us to be able to eat meat only if necessary...

I'm laughing. You lack common sense of what is science. No wonder you've got mired in pseudoscience.
Since you are ignorant in what is science, I'd like to give an example here, and this example is for readers (whether you'd like to be included, you decide) who have respect for genuine science:
Ever heard of Bruce Alberts? Well, he's president of the National Academy of Sciences, also a biochemist. He's no doubt a formidable figure in science, right? When he said “There are many very outstanding members of this academy who are very religious people, people who believe in evolution, many of them biologists,” he's talking about the situation of his own academy. Do you think he's sounding trustworthy? According to your logic: his knowledge and long time experience in his own academy(the counterpart of your word "his knowledge and long time expertise in this field"), he should have told the truth. But such a point of view is not science because it is not published in a peer-reviewed scientific magazine or journal. To check it out, scientists conducted a survey and published the result in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Nature, pointing out the truth is that leading scientists still reject God, contrary to what Alberts said. The following is the link to the Nature peer-reviewed article:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v394/n6691/full/394313a0.html

That is exactly COMMON SENSE: no matter how authoritative you are in science community, even if you're a Nobel laureate, you have to abide by the rule of the community: Publish your findings in a PEER-REVIEWED scientific magazine/journal. Otherwise, readers have proper reason to reject you!

I don't doubt that you can prolong your life by giving up most things in which you find pleasure, but why would you want to? I would much rather live 65 years of pleasurable experiences that 100 of puritanical restraint.

Having said this, there is something pathological in people who indulge to excess so I'm not endorsing gluttony or hedonism.

Dr T. Colin Campbell has never made any religious statements or references. His references are all scientific research and analysis.
I searched the internet to see if I could find any hidden religious associations, but there is none, even on wikipedia there is none.
I understand that it is healthy to be skeptical, but without any research to back up one's skepticism doesn't make sense.
I apologise if I seem or am rude or disrespectful, but I do get frustrated when I recieve skepticism without any back up research on Dr Campbell. As if I just dreamed it all up out of my own head.
Yes, I am a Christian but not a fundamentalist one. I'm a bible moralist rather than a bible literalist. I don't discriminate science or evolution. I see no contradiction between science and my Christian perception.
And I do believe in healthy initiatives on the human body, mind and our social interactions with one another...

Yes I do agree. It is a personal preference from the question of possibility or impossibilty.
But I think when people start having children, they usually start thinking outside of the square of themselves for the well-being of their children...

Sorry Izzy I didn't know what the cross symbol icon was all about until i clicked it. I certainly don't imply changing your dietary preference whatsoever. Your preferences of life belong strictly only to you and nobody else.
I am merely interested in discussing scientific alternatives for promoting health. But yes I know what you mean, when someone tells me I can't eat that beautiful passionfruit cheese cake, he better run for the hills or else...

Russell Howards Cancer song is based in fact. Everything single item in the song has been alleged to be carcinogenic by The Daily Mail.

You can believe who/what you want, just don't be disappointed when others aren't so eager.

Not at all disappointed Izzy. I don't really care if people don't like or prefer the ideas of Dr Colin Campbell, that's their business not mine.
I think the unpleasant tone of the discussion arises from the replies of A2kers who tell me about their skeptism without having watched the youtube film clip or having done any research on Dr Campbell, amazing really amazing. As if I just dreamed it all up inside my own head.
Its as if they are trying to defy rationale itself. Hmmm, strange days in paradise I would say...

Ah . . . so to inhabit paradise, one need only agree with Amoh.