Something everyone should be aware of...

nesf

cormie wrote:

I wasn't preaching.

....


I personally don't see any harm in posting the videos. If you care about your food, health and that of animals too, then I think it's advisable to see how some of the foods available to us at some stage in our life may have been treated.

You see, you just preached there. This for you, is a moral issue. You believe that treating animals this way is wrong. That's fair enough as far as I'm concerned, but as soon as you set out to educate the rest of us you are preaching and moralising and that's a whole different kettle of fish.

cormie wrote:

I don't think there's much to argue with in what I just wrote, which is how I intended the first post to be, but obviously didn't word it too well:p

See above.

faceman

nesf wrote:

You see, you just preached there. This for you, is a moral issue. You believe that treating animals this way is wrong. That's fair enough as far as I'm concerned, but as soon as you set out to educate the rest of us you are preaching and moralising and that's a whole different kettle of fish.

in fairness nesf, as misguided as the OP's original post is, there is no point in beating him up about it. his heart is in the right place. Regardless of whether the footage was filmed in ireland, america or mars, its still animal cruelty. Just because it doesnt happen on our shores, doesnt mean we shoudnt be concerned or emotionless about it.

Still not turning me into a veggie tho!

nesf

faceman wrote:

in fairness nesf, as misguided as the OP's original post is, there is no point in beating him up about it. his heart is in the right place. Regardless of whether the footage was filmed in ireland, america or mars, its still animal cruelty. Just because it doesnt happen on our shores, doesnt mean we shoudnt be concerned or emotionless about it.!

I'm not beating him up over it, I'm pointing out that if you get up and preach a controversial moral issue then some people will disagree and and criticise you. Nothing more. I've a fair few friends who are committed vegans and vegetarians. We get along fine despite holding quite different moral views on these things simply because we don't preach to each other seeking to 'educate' the other one on the 'truth'. You will notice that I haven't told him that his views are wrong or that he should change them.

faceman

nesf wrote:

I'm not beating him up over it, I'm pointing out that if you get up and preach a controversial moral issue then some people will disagree and and criticise you. Nothing more. I've a fair few friends who are committed vegans and vegetarians. We get along fine despite holding quite different moral views on these things simply because we don't preach to each other seeking to 'educate' the other one on the 'truth'. You will notice that I haven't told him that his views are wrong or that he should change them.

if i misinterpreted then i apologise!

Nature Boy

Hi I haven't read most of the post on this thread, mainly because there are so many of them.

In general there seems to be a lot of people saying things like we need meat to survive and vegetarianism/veganism is unhealthy etc without backing it up with anything. There is a lot of scientific research showing that animal foods are unhealthy.

Anyways I'm a veggie. I do think people should know about how animals are treated, but I guess there should have been a warning on the first post about the content of the video (even though I didn't actually watch them).

A lot of people say they love meat too much to be veggie. I used to love meat and never thought I could do it but I did. Just give it a try!

Terry

Nature Boy wrote:

A lot of people say they love meat too much to be veggie. I used to love meat and never thought I could do it but I did. Just give it a try!

No.

faceman

julep wrote:

No.

No x2

Gaspode

cormie wrote:

Well the difference is that in the past the animals would be treated as best as possible to help them grow to be good producers of milk etc naturally and to be a nice serving once they are killed.

Sorry, no thats just not true. In the past, there was no regulation of the meat industry - its now one of the most regulated industries in the world.

As I said, I'm a meat eater too, I'm just a bit more concerned about where my meat comes from now. I'd really prefer not to eat meat that has come from an animal pumped full of hormones and subjected to such stressful and dangerous conditions.

Good thinking - buy high quality meats from reputable suppliers with good traceability. Lower quality meats - burgers, sausages, pudding etc is made from the poorest parts of the animal (parts you wouldnt even think of!) so best keep away from them!

I don't think the videos are fake at all. The extremities of what goes on, probably, but not fake.

Ok agreed - the extremes of what can be found, but there are always those who break the rules for profit in any industry.
However I found the second video in particular to be a crock of unsubstantiated ****e .
There was so much misinformation in it, and it was totally lopsided to appeal to the softy do-gooders of the world. Especially the shot of the calves withthe big eyes!
For instance, they show a shot of a cow with sore teats and say 'this is a cow with inflamed teats'. Was that shot from a working farm? Was the cow being milked? Come on lads give evidence not innuendo - they are suggesting that cows with mastitis are being milked but not presenting any evidence. (I'm a city slicker, but I'm sure that a cow with mastitis in all 4 quarters of her teats like that will not produce any milk at all)

Anyway thats just one example - the whole video was stuffed full of propaganda and very little evidence. I'm not naive enough to believe that no farms cut corners, or that aniamls have the easy life, but really these particular videos serve only to annoy me really, not make me reconsider my lifestyle.

Nature Boy

julep wrote:

No.

Sorry I was referring to people who expressed an interest in becoming veggie, not you

cormie

nesf wrote:

You see, you just preached there. This for you, is a moral issue. You believe that treating animals this way is wrong. That's fair enough as far as I'm concerned, but as soon as you set out to educate the rest of us you are preaching and moralising and that's a whole different kettle of fish.

Ok I get what you're saying, I suppose there are some who don't think treating animals/subjecting their bodies to eat meat treated in this way is wrong.

Deswalsh, when I said in the past I meant way way wayyy back when people farmed what they eat themselves.

I'm not suggesting anyone to reconsider their lifestyle, just to be more aware of what they could possibly be buying and the conditions animals had to endure to produce it.

Blush_01

cormie wrote:

Deswalsh, when I said in the past I meant way way wayyy back when people farmed what they eat themselves.

You do know that some crazy people out there still do farm what they eat themselves, don't you? They're called - it's shocking, I know, but true - FARMERS!

brianthebard

cormie wrote:

Ok I get what you're saying, I suppose there are some who don't think treating animals/subjecting their bodies to eat meat treated in this way is wrong.

Deswalsh, when I said in the past I meant way way wayyy back when people farmed what they eat themselves.

Dude that's like thirty years ago in this country. A generation, two at best. Personally I think people either mistreat animals or don't. A few don't know better but not many, and they would be quickly taught. People who don't like animals generally don't work with them. What would be the point?

Kennington

Here, Vegetarians -

Check out those long pointy teeth in your mouth.

They're called Canines. All meat eating animals have them.

Now sit down and shut the f**k up.

Caliden

That first video has nothing to do with your arguement so why post it?
I knew they skinned animals but I didnt know they skinned them alive

Nature Boy

Kennington wrote:

Here, Vegetarians -

Check out those long pointy teeth in your mouth.

They're called Canines. All meat eating animals have them.

Now sit down and shut the f**k up.

I think if you compare meat eater's teeth to human teeth you'll find a big difference. They generally have all blade like teeth, we have molars and a few 'sharp' teeth (which are used to bite into hard fruit & veg)

Meat eaters have highly acidic stomach designed for killing bacteria in meat and quickly digesting it. We have low acidic stomachs designed for slow digestion.

Meat eaters have short intestines, again designed for quick digestion. We have a long system of intestines, for slow digestion.

Meat eaters' jaws generally can be opened widely and cannot be moved from side to side. We have the opposite (a jaw moving from side to side
is used to grind food).

Meat eaters have acidic saliva whereas we have alkaline saliva

In general, our digestive system is much more suited to a plant based diet. Meat stays in carnivore/omnivore's bodies only for a matter of hours (because you don't want a rotting corpse in your body for too long, it could lead to diseases), whereas it stays rotting in human body for a couple of days.

Reference:

http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2005/09/are-humans-carnivores-or-herbivores-2/

P.S. sorry about the lack of references, but I'm too lazy just now! I'll post more if you like

Terry

cows have 4 stomachs. all they eat is grass.

Nature Boy

julep wrote:

cows have 4 stomachs. all they eat is grass.

They actually only have one stomach with 4 compartments. It's designed for a long, slow digestive process. I think it's so they can re-digest food multiple times. Cow's milk for example takes a lot of digesting

cormie

Interesting stuff there Nature boy, maybe were not such omnivores after all!

What about the way we'd have to cook the meat too? I know there are some meats you don't need to cook (sushi is all I can think of though).?

Caliden

you dont have to cook steak very much at all. I know someone who eats their steak 'bleu' (blue, yes he is french) which means 15 seconds cooking on each side. :O

Nature Boy

Because animal flesh generally comes from an animal that's been dead for a good few days (maybe even a week or two), bacteria will have built up on it. How much depends on how long the animal has been dead and how the animal's flesh was stored. We cook it so as to kill bacteria, cos our bodies can't do it for us.

Some people do eat raw meat but it's probably not very recommendable!

faceman

Caliden wrote:

you dont have to cook steak very much at all. I know someone who eats their steak 'bleu' (blue, yes he is french) which means 15 seconds cooking on each side. :O

altho i love meat and steak, i dont recommend this at all! Anyone who has ever discovered they have a tapeworm will know why!!

Mossy Monk

Caliden wrote:

you dont have to cook steak very much at all. I know someone who eats their steak 'bleu' (blue, yes he is french) which means 15 seconds cooking on each side. :O

he is quite clearly not of this world

Wibbs

Look we're omnivores m'kay but.....

Nature Boy wrote:

I think if you compare meat eater's teeth to human teeth you'll find a big difference. They generally have all blade like teeth, we have molars and a few 'sharp' teeth (which are used to bite into hard fruit & veg)

Pure carnivore has canines and ridged molars, pure herbivore has flat molars no canines. Human has canines and ridged molars. Also as we evolved our canines have reduced in size. Stone tools etc meant we could render the meat far more easily than other animals. Our earliest ancestors had a physique very close to herbivores like the gorilla. a large chest and gut area for the breakdown of vegetable matter. Modern human evolutionary trends show a move away from tha body shape towrds the gut profile of a carnivore.

Meat eaters have highly acidic stomach designed for killing bacteria in meat and quickly digesting it. We have low acidic stomachs designed for slow digestion.

Pure herbivores have very low acidic stomachs and rely far more heavily on bacterial breakdown of food. Carnivores have higher acidity and rely far less on bacterial help in digestion. many herbivores have more than one 'stomach" to help with this slow process. Again the discovery of fire reduced the need for the acidic level in the stomach.

Meat eaters have short intestines, again designed for quick digestion. We have a long system of intestines, for slow digestion.

Not really when expressed as a ratio with body length. The wolf has a gut to body length ratio of 1.7, the human 1.5, the cow 1.20. Our colon is short like a carnivore, unlike in the herbivore. Our appendix is vestigial and our gall bladder is far more like a carnivore than a herbivore in function(many herbivores don't even have one or it's very small by comparison).

Meat eaters' jaws generally can be opened widely and cannot be moved from side to side. We have the opposite (a jaw moving from side to side
is used to grind food).

As you would expect with an omnivorous species. That said the rat is an omnivore yet has a carnivores jaw structure.

Meat eaters have acidic saliva whereas we have alkaline saliva

Again similar to the rat.

In general, our digestive system is much more suited to a plant based diet.

Then why can't we break down and digest cellulose like pretty much every herbivore out there if we're so suited to a veggie diet.

Meat stays in carnivore/omnivore's bodies only for a matter of hours (because you don't want a rotting corpse in your body for too long, it could lead to diseases), whereas it stays rotting in human body for a couple of days.

Rotting? Who have you been reading? Dr Kellog? No it doesn't unless you've got very bad digestion. Try an Atkins style diet for a while and you would be surprised how quick your rhythms re adjust. As you said a herbivore has a long digestive process, we have a short one(if healthy) like a carnivore.

I like my steak blue myself. Hell I used to eat raw mince when I was a kid. On the sly though as it was rightly frowned upon. I still like raw fish though.

Capt'n Midnight

Kennington wrote:

Here, Vegetarians -

Check out those long pointy teeth in your mouth.

They're called Canines. All meat eating animals have them.

Now sit down and shut the f**k up.

:rolleyes: Most meat eating animals don't have canines because they are insects , fish , reptiles amphibians , bird or ameoba or other invertebrates. Nor do insectivors or whales, dolphins, seals.

Now please explain why we have broad flat molars

Nature Boy

Wibbs wrote:

Look we're omnivores m'kay but.....Pure carnivore has canines and ridged molars, pure herbivore has flat molars no canines. Human has canines and ridged molars. Also as we evolved our canines have reduced in size. Stone tools etc meant we could render the meat far more easily than other animals. Our earliest ancestors had a physique very close to herbivores like the gorilla. a large chest and gut area for the breakdown of vegetable matter. Modern human evolutionary trends show a move away from tha body shape towrds the gut profile of a carnivore.
Pure herbivores have very low acidic stomachs and rely far more heavily on bacterial breakdown of food. Carnivores have higher acidity and rely far less on bacterial help in digestion. many herbivores have more than one 'stomach" to help with this slow process. Again the discovery of fire reduced the need for the acidic level in the stomach.

Not really when expressed as a ratio with body length. The wolf has a gut to body length ratio of 1.7, the human 1.5, the cow 1.20. Our colon is short like a carnivore, unlike in the herbivore. Our appendix is vestigial and our gall bladder is far more like a carnivore than a herbivore in function(many herbivores don't even have one or it's very small by comparison).
As you would expect with an omnivorous species. That said the rat is an omnivore yet has a carnivores jaw structure.
Again similar to the rat.
Then why can't we break down and digest cellulose like pretty much every herbivore out there if we're so suited to a veggie diet.Rotting? Who have you been reading? Dr Kellog? No it doesn't unless you've got very bad digestion. Try an Atkins style diet for a while and you would be surprised how quick your rhythms re adjust. As you said a herbivore has a long digestive process, we have a short one(if healthy) like a carnivore.

I like my steak blue myself. Hell I used to eat raw mince when I was a kid. On the sly though as it was rightly frowned upon. I still like raw fish though.

Thanks for the reply!

Could you let me know where you got all of this from? Seems like an interesting read.

So, basically what you're saying is that we started off as herbivores and we are evolving into omnivores. Obviously, according to our friend Darwin, animals only change or evolve if it is beneficial to their survival.

What would you say is our reason for 'evolving' into omnivores? Baring in mind that eating animal foods has been proven to cause some cancers and heart disease, increases colestorol etc.

nesf

Wibbs wrote:

Look we're omnivores m'kay but.....Pure carnivore has canines and ridged molars, pure herbivore has flat molars no canines. Human has canines and ridged molars. Also as we evolved our canines have reduced in size. Stone tools etc meant we could render the meat far more easily than other animals. Our earliest ancestors had a physique very close to herbivores like the gorilla. a large chest and gut area for the breakdown of vegetable matter. Modern human evolutionary trends show a move away from tha body shape towrds the gut profile of a carnivore.
Pure herbivores have very low acidic stomachs and rely far more heavily on bacterial breakdown of food. Carnivores have higher acidity and rely far less on bacterial help in digestion. many herbivores have more than one 'stomach" to help with this slow process. Again the discovery of fire reduced the need for the acidic level in the stomach.

Not really when expressed as a ratio with body length. The wolf has a gut to body length ratio of 1.7, the human 1.5, the cow 1.20. Our colon is short like a carnivore, unlike in the herbivore. Our appendix is vestigial and our gall bladder is far more like a carnivore than a herbivore in function(many herbivores don't even have one or it's very small by comparison).
As you would expect with an omnivorous species. That said the rat is an omnivore yet has a carnivores jaw structure.
Again similar to the rat.
Then why can't we break down and digest cellulose like pretty much every herbivore out there if we're so suited to a veggie diet.Rotting? Who have you been reading? Dr Kellog? No it doesn't unless you've got very bad digestion. Try an Atkins style diet for a while and you would be surprised how quick your rhythms re adjust. As you said a herbivore has a long digestive process, we have a short one(if healthy) like a carnivore.

I like my steak blue myself. Hell I used to eat raw mince when I was a kid. On the sly though as it was rightly frowned upon. I still like raw fish though.

Now that's just nasty. Why did you have to go and spoil all his lovely sounding pseudo-science?

Nature Boy

nesf wrote:

Now that's just nasty. Why did you have to go and spoil all his lovely sounding pseudo-science?

At least his/her post was a genuine responce to an earlier post. Unlike your sh1t attempt at an insult.

Gaspode

The amount of misinformation, prejudice, urban myth and pure crap being spouted on this thread is fascinating. The bit about the rotting corpse in our stomachs is the funniest so far.
Keep it up guys, I might get a thesis out of this yet: "Human nutrition and how much humans actually know about it" or maybe "The misinformation superhighway and its effects on the eating habits of the lesser spotted boardster"

However, if I'm to get published I'll need references, so I'll have to insist that anyone posting 'facts' also quote the source of these wierd and wonderful facts.
Many thanks, your soon to be Professor of Nutrition.

Nature Boy

deswalsh wrote:

The amount of misinformation, prejudice, urban myth and pure crap being spouted on this thread is fascinating. The bit about the rotting corpse in our stomachs is the funniest so far.
Keep it up guys, I might get a thesis out of this yet: "Human nutrition and how much humans actually know about it" or maybe "The misinformation superhighway and its effects on the eating habits of the lesser spotted boardster"

However, if I'm to get published I'll need references, so I'll have to insist that anyone posting 'facts' also quote the source of these wierd and wonderful facts.
Many thanks, your soon to be Professor of Nutrition.

I put out an opinion to be discussed. I thought this was a discussion forum. There are a lot of scientists that would back up what I was trying to say.

Obviously most people here are more interested in taking the piss.

nesf

Nature Boy wrote:

At least his/her post was a genuine responce to an earlier post. Unlike your sh1t attempt at an insult.

How is it an insult? What you posted is pseudo-science.