Jump to content

Sniffie

Members
  • Posts

    714
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sniffie

  1. Tombeej, I made your macnut butter, it is very yummie indeed! I am afraid I will have to hide it from myself.Where do you buy your macadamias?
  2. Ever wondered why it is so difficult to control the carb monster / -werewolf inside us? Look at that amount of sugar! No wonder it can become like an addiction!
  3. Where do you guys buy fresh berries (raspberries and blueberries)? PnP, Woolies.
  4. You have just given yourself another good reason to cut the carb intake in favour of healthy animal and plant fats and animal protein. Good luck trying to find GMO free wheat or maize products in SA. Do not believe the package if it states GMO free. Visit any commercial grain silo in your area and ask the manager if they keep the GMO maize apart from the non GMO. Maize in one form or another is found in a lot processed carbs making its way onto your plate.
  5. You can extract nutrients from meat because our species evolved over thousands of years from being small brained herbivores to big brained omnivores. It is a fact that our closest cousins the chimpanzees hunt other apes and small game.
  6. The cow with the pap mielie is actually a sick bull.
  7. No I wont.It is a pity that the hub crash erased almost the whole LCHF thread here on the hub. I am not sure if you followed it in any way. It was one of the fastest moving threads on the hub, and the number of people that have indicated that their health markers like weight, body fat %, blood lipid levels and blood glucose levels have improved by cutting carbs from their diet, must be indicative of the fact that modern lifestyle diseases are caused by an over consumption of carbs.
  8. I did. Please read: "Why we get fat." by world renowned expert Gary Taubes, and "The Paleo diet" by Loren Cordain. PhD. Full of scientifically proven facts, not facebook mumbo jumbo. Then we can have a meaningful talk?
  9. Not sure but I would not argue with you. Fact is they live in a harsh climate and the possibility of being gored by an angry bison or falling overboard during a hunt at sea must be very real. Much safer running across the street to Woolies.(even in SA ) Fact is if they survive till 65 it will be very healthy years and I suppose then they would not be actively involved in hunting the dangerous animals anymore. Since they don't have to fear lifestyle sicknesses I see no reason why they wont reach 90 or even 100. Their healthy diet are providing them with everything they need and they live in a relative pollution free environmennt.
  10. By the way, scientific fact: Of the 3 food sources in the human diet, carbohydrates, protein and fat only carbohydrates are non essential. You can't live without protein or fat but you can thrive on a diet without any carbs at all.
  11. Who said we are suffering ill effects from eating meat? The ill effects suffered by modern humans are caused by a diet rich in processed carbs. I will give you just one example; The Inuit people of Alaska eat a diet that is 80% saturated fat and 20% protein, with only trace amounts of carbs. (Not a lot of green stuff around when the ground is covered in snow all year) They don't only survive but they thrive on this diet. The lean parts of the walrus carcasses are fed to their dogs. They go for the big pieces of brown fat that they mix with the lean bison meat. This is eaten raw. They are so healthy that there is no recorded cases of modern life style diseases like cardiovascular disease or diabetes. They also don't get scurvy at all as the walrus fat and bison meat provide them with ample vitamins and minerals. The only time of year they get sick is in spring when their stash of walrus fat and bison meat mix are finished and they are forced to live from snow rabbits. The meat is lean and do not offer any vitamins. Then they have scurvy symptoms. Do yourself a favour and google rabbit poisoning, very interesting.
  12. The average producers prizes for this week are; R28,15 for super beef and R44.30 for super lamb. You must make a loan and buy all his free range lamb at R45.00! You can sell it at double the price. I say again the man is not making a cent of profit at these prizes.
  13. Off course our bodies evolved to eat meat. Our huge brain size compared to other hominids are a direct result of the change in our diet due to the nutrient dense animal protein source. We developed along a total different path to true carnivores like the cats and wolves, so to say that we are not supposed to eat meat because we do not have true canines is bullocks.
  14. Who told you so? Look at any hunter gatherer society through the whole world. The main part of the diet is animal protein. Do you think the San and Khoi bushmen of the Kalahari can survive on grass and tsammas or the Inuit on seaweed?
  15. Free range pork? Never heard of that. The farmer must be family or good friend to sell it to you so cheaply. He is not making a cent of profit on prices so low.
  16. Ok, as maize and cattle farmer I will try to add some perspective. "Off" mielie pap will have a sour smell. Are you sure that is what you smelled? I have never heard of or experienced something like that. Possible in any way that your domestic worker spilled some porridge or maize meal on the stove before you cooked the meat? You say it was stewing beef, was it only meat or did it still have bones in it? Was it lean or quite fatty? The reason I ask is because if the cold chain since slaughter has been broken at any stage, even only for an hour or so meat especially with sawn through bones start to spoil quickly. (You can prove this for your self by leaving some beef with plenty of bone, like shin, in the fridge alongside a clean cut like rump. The shin will start to "smell" after only a day or two while the rump will stay fresh much longer.) Warm raw fat also picks up aromas of other stuff in it's vicinity more quickly than lean cold meat. What an animal ate during its life, especially the last 3 months before slaughter, will determine the taste, and most of this taste lies in the fat. That is why karoo lamb taste different from freestate and both taste different from natal. The fatty acids in the fat of animals is where a lot of the flavour lies and these are quite volatile. This is what you smell the instant that steak hits the grill. Grass fed vs grain fed: I would guess that 5% or less off beef consumed in SA are pure grass fed. Why? Short answer economics. As cattle farmer it makes sense to sell my calves as soon as they can be weaned to a commercial feedlot. In doing so I am shortening the inter calf period, I carry a lot less risk, and I can keep more cows per hectare. That is why genuine grass fed beef will be much more expensive. On the other hand grain fed does not mean that the cattle only eat corn flakes. Cattle are ruminants and even though yellow maize form part of the ration used by most feed lots they also need a lot of roughage in the form of grass hay or silage. The colour of fat are not so much determined by grass fed or grain fed. It is determined by breed, and to a lesser extent age off an animal. (As a rule of thumb whiter = younger and older more of a creamy or darker hue of white) Classic example of the breed thing is the butter like yellow of the jersey's fat. (By the way if you like your biltong fatty, jerseys makes the best biltong of any breed and that is a fact!) The fat of grass fed beef from the green Natal midlands will most probably be quite yellow, while the fat of beef from the Kalahari or Namibia might be whiter than the fat of beef from a feedlot using yellow maize as energy. Consumer research done by the Red meat producers organization has shown that the SA consumer prefer white fat over yellow and this is taken into account by the different beef stud farmers in the selection of breeding material. The different rations of different feedlots will certainly play a role in the colour of the fat, so I would guess that beef from a feedlot in Mpumalanga where yellow maize is used as energy in the ration should be more yellow than beef produced in the Natal midlands where bergasse (edit spelling?), a by product of the sugar cane industry is used. If the feedlot that your local butcher gets his carcasses from is close to a brewery chanses are that at least a part of the energy component in the ration are dried distillers grain. So next time if your steak has a hint of Castle Lager it might not be your imagination or intoxication! It might actually be true.
  17. Sensational win by Nibali!
  18. Hi Neg You may want to check out this topic as well. Very relevant to your problem. Crank arm Length for 29er
  19. Get hold of an easy out. It is designed to do the job. Your lbs will have an assortment of sizes for different size bolts. www.ehow.com/how_5127433_use-easy-outs.html
  20. I never said I would spot an obstacle that is 5 mm higher than the other. Your comment is pointless. I can only add my own experience. I have two dualies both with 175 mm cranks. The first one's bb is roughly 10 mm higher above the ground than no 2. When ridden over the same rocky climb and on the same deeply trodden cattle path with the same amount of sag on the rear shock for both bikes, I do experience far less pedal strikes with no 1. If 10 mm more of clearance under the bottom of the pedal makes such a difference, then obviously even 5 mm will also help clear some obstacles. I know that according to cycling wisdom crank length is supposed to be determined by your femur length, and I do not have a problem with that. My point is this that even when shortening the crank form 175 mm to 165 mm, the resultant change in torque is less than 6%. Not a huge difference, and something one would through conditioning be able to cope with easily. According to crank calculators available on the web, my ideal length is 172 mm. 165 mm cranks would mean that I am 4% away from ideal. Certainly that is not to bad at all, and as I said before 10 mm really makes a HUGE difference to the number of pedal strikes I encounter. Thats my 2c's worth. What bothers me a bit more is that by going 10 mm shorter on the cranks, I will have to raise the saddle 10 mm to have the same amount of knee flexion on the pedal stroke. Higher saddle = higher centre of gravity = less control?
  21. In my post I was referring to pedalstrikes and not bb hits. 5 mm makes a difference on a technical rocky climb believe me. Also on switchbacks going uphill can make the difference between an inside pedal strike or not.
  22. Jaco this is not a stupid question as many may think. It depends a lot on the type of terrain and riding you are most likely to do. My 29'ers bb sits 10 mm closer to the ground than my 26". I find it quite annoying hitting my pedals on rocks, roots and the sides of some deep cattle track with the standard 175 mm cranks on the 29'er. Will be changing to 165 mm in the near future. Do your own measurements and consider the type of riding you are likely to do and then make your decision.
  23. Quite a lot of us might have considered it at some stage, but few have actually summed up the courage to tackle something really big. Isak Coetzer is currently living his dream by cycling from Bothaville to Stellenbosch via Bloem, Queenstown, East Londen, PE and route 62. At the same time making awareness for MOvember and raising funds for Cansa. Check out his progress on his facebook page and support a worthy cause. http://www.facebook....128556100627834
  24. Hi Hubbers. I was wondering if any one has experimented with shorter cranks on their Mtb? I am riding a Giant Anthem 29" dual suspension. Nice bike, somewhat on the heavy side, but what bugs me the most is that my pedals gets caught on rocks, roots and other stuff way more often than with my previous bike (Raleigh MR 9.0 26" dualie). The reason for this is that the Giant's BB sits about 10 mm lower than that of the Raleigh. Both bikes have the same crank length of 175 mm. I understand that going shorter will mean less torque, but then you could down shift to an easier gear if your power fails you on a steep technical section right? Or am I missing something here. When dropping to an easier gear to still apply the same force on the pedals you will have to up your cadence to maintain the same speed or power up a climb, am I right? My question is how will this effect endurance or is it just a question of conditioning at higher cadences? How will it affect my technical ability, as I find it easier keeping my balance up a gnarly section pushing a slightly heavier gear? For the record: I am 1.87m tall and most of my riding is marathon events, but I do enjoy the technical single track type of event more than just riding on district roads. I would appreciate any advice on this matter.
  25. Let's pull some threads together: Enticement is trying to pull the 'fracking' 'woolies' over our eyes so if he does not come to 'what's the point' let's 'boycot'.
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout