food for thought

rawn · 28-10-2013 08:04PM

sok2005 wrote: »

Does PETA get a euro each time someone refuses meat?

Every time someone shares a PETA story on Facebook, a little lamb gets set free...

...to be eaten by a wolf. #circleoflife #thatsnaturebítches #meatismurder

I don't normally use hashtags, ever, but this time they seemed appropriate

28-10-2013 08:04PM

IM0 wrote: »

hard to argue with though, makes alot of sense when you read through it

It really doesn't.

IM0 wrote: »

is the info in it factually wrong though thats the point

Yes, it is. It actually uses completely abstract statements to prove an unrelated point.

"Do you dream about hunting prey? If not, you shouldn't eat meat", well I don't dream about harvesting wheat or pulling up carrots either. I guess I should just starve since I don't have any dreams about living as a hunter-gatherer or farmer.

Shout Dust · 28-10-2013 08:05PM

When you see dead animals on the side of the road, are you tempted to stop and snack on them? Does the sight of a dead bird make you salivate? Do you daydream about killing cows with your bare hands and eating them raw? If you answered "no" to these questions, congratulations—like it or not, you're an herbivore.

I also don't salivate at the sight of leaves and grass, what does that make me?

rawn · 28-10-2013 08:05PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Examples?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=high+protein+fruit+and+vegetables

sok2005 · 28-10-2013 08:06PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Examples?

Quinoa, chickpeas, wholegrains, beans, pumpkin seeds, peanut butter.

IM0 · 28-10-2013 08:07PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Examples?

straight off top of head. kidney beans and various nuts

Magnetics · 28-10-2013 08:08PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Examples?

sok2005 wrote: »

Quinoa, chickpeas, wholegrains, beans, pumpkin seeds, peanut butter.

and soybeans, lentils, peas, artichokes

SparkySpitfire · 28-10-2013 08:08PM

3 issues:

1. They say we don't look at animals and salivate at the thoughts of killing them, nor do we gorge on carcasses we happen to come across.
I would argue that this is more of a matter of living in a modern society. If man never looked at an animal and thought "yum", then why would they have started to kill and eat them in the first place? Secondly, if I saw a carrot on the ground I wouldn't pick that up and eat it. Maybe because we live in a society where that wouldn't be the norm.

2. They say we don't have the characteristics of carnivores. Why are they comparing us to carnivores when we're omnivores? Should we not be compared to hedgehogs instead of lions?

3. It's written by PETA = biased as ****. Anyone can hire a researcher to back up their own agendas.

Now excuse me, my hog roast needs turning.

wretcheddomain · 28-10-2013 08:09PM

rawn wrote: »

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=high+protein+fruit+and+vegetables

sok2005 wrote: »

Quinoa, chickpeas, wholegrains, beans, pumpkin seeds, peanut butter.

The point isn't that certain fruit and vegetables have modest protein content but that the vast majority of people do not exclusively rely on these sources (kindly quoted above) for their protein intake. Meat and fish are the principle sources of protein and whether or not certain vegetables have modest content is not the reality of how people have actually received their protein for many thousands of years.

Red Kev · 28-10-2013 08:09PM

NuckingFacker wrote: »

I agree. Raw meat is awful, and probably bad for you. That is why God invented cookers and barbecues. Mmmm. Ribs.

Steak Tartare is gorgeous, when made properly. The German variant Mettwurst is pretty fabulous when well made as well.

pharmaton · 28-10-2013 08:11PM

sok2005 wrote: »

Does PETA get a euro each time someone refuses meat?

brace yourself it's the daily mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106757/PETA-killed-95-adoptable-dogs-cats-care-year.html

wrt fruit & veg proteins, they are not devoid of protein, peas/chickpeads, spinach, broccoli even potatoes contain a relatively high amount (although nowhere near comparable to meat content). If you eat dairy products you can add in more and with nuts or the occasional egg you can have a meat free diet that is substantial enough to get by on.
Wouldn't be my cup of tea though I don't eat vast amounts of red meats, I'm happy enough with chicken and fish to compliment my rda.

rawn · 28-10-2013 08:12PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

The point isn't that certain fruit and vegetables have modest protein content but that the vast majority of people do not exclusively rely on these sources (kindly quoted above) for their protein intake. Meat and fish are the principle sources of protein and whether or not certain vegetables have modest content is not the reality of how people have actually received their protein for many thousands of years.

If you eat them in high enough quantities, you'll get your protein. But my opinion is that you shouldn't rely on meat to be your main source of protein. The meat portion on your plate shouldn't be bigger than your veg and starch.

Tin Foil Hat · 28-10-2013 08:15PM

IM0 wrote: »

after reading this its pretty clear humans were not meant to have a large amount of meat in our diets. I normally laugh at the idea of vegeterianism but after reading this its certainly food for thought about reducing meat in your diet by alot, not to the extreme like vegeterians or vegans though, just reducing meat intake by alot not eliminating it completely though

http://www.peta.org/living/vegetarian-living/the-natural-human-diet.aspx

This article is written by someone who fails to understand that our use of tools and cooking had direct consequences for our subsequent evolution.

kona · 28-10-2013 08:15PM

IM0 wrote: »

after reading this its pretty clear humans were not meant to have a large amount of meat in our diets. I normally laugh at the idea of vegeterianism but after reading this its certainly food for thought about reducing meat in your diet by alot, not to the extreme like vegeterians or vegans though, just reducing meat intake by alot not eliminating it completely though

fillet steak ftw, seal it up and taste the blood.

The One Who Knocks · 28-10-2013 08:15PM

Before this turns into a full blown argument, I'm gonna reiterate my main points.

Although many humans choose to eat a wide variety of plant and animal foods, earning us the dubious title of "omnivore," we are anatomically herbivorous

This is wrong. Therefore the whole argument is fundamentally wrong, as it is based on this point. We are not anatomically herbivorous. We are anatomically omnivorous.

1. We have hydrochloric acid in our stomachs - herbivores do not.
2. We don't have cellulase (which breaks down plants) - herbivores do.
3. We have canines - herbivores do not.

We are similar to other omnivores such as bonobos, chimpanzees, gorillas, humans and orangutans. Therefore we thrive on a diet consisting of both plants & meat.

desertcircus · 28-10-2013 08:15PM

IM0 wrote: »

after reading this its pretty clear humans were not meant to have a large amount of meat in our diets. I normally laugh at the idea of vegeterianism but after reading this its certainly food for thought about reducing meat in your diet by alot, not to the extreme like vegeterians or vegans though, just reducing meat intake by alot not eliminating it completely though

http://www.peta.org/living/vegetarian-living/the-natural-human-diet.aspx

This is an absolutely terrible article. Humans evolved as omnivores, eating cooked meat (because cooking drastically reduces the amount of calories needed to digest food and so maximises the benefit you get). That's why we have sharp teeth at the front of our mouths; they're built to rip and cut meat. The length of our intestines is a consequence of the fact that cooking food minimises the chances of it causing us to get ill, and so we can get the most nutrition by having a long intestinal passage. The buildup of fat in our arteries is at least partially a result of the fact that we're living vastly longer than our bodies evolved to keep working properly for.

There's a very strong case for vegetarianism, but it's a moral rather than a scientific one. We shouldn't eat animals because it's impossible to properly justify the deliberate killing of sentient creatures to satisfy our desire to eat meat (and I say that as someone who eats meat; it's very hard to square it morally). Resorting to abysmal science cheapens the moral case.

28-10-2013 08:19PM

rawn wrote: »

You should eat less meat for your own benefit though.

Less than what?

Between animal welfare, economic issues, ethical issues and nutrition, plenty of people are already well informed on reasons to limit or increase their meat intake. 'Less' isn't a general rule.

mcwinning · 28-10-2013 08:21PM

Given that it comes from PETA I would suspect it is severely cherry picked literature.

Miss Lockhart · 28-10-2013 08:22PM

Jamez735 wrote: »

Before this turns into a full blown argument, I'm gonna reiterate my main points.

This is wrong. Therefore the whole argument is fundamentally wrong, as it is based on this point. We are not anatomically herbivorous. We are anatomically omnivorous.

1. We have hydrochloric acid in our stomachs - herbivores do not.
2. We don't have cellulase (which breaks down plants) - herbivores do.
3. We have canines - herbivores do not.

We are similar to other omnivores such as bonobos, chimpanzees, gorillas, humans and orangutans. Therefore we thrive on a diet consisting of both plants & meat.

Although I agree we are anatomically omnivorous I have to point out that some of your own information is just as factually incorrect as that which you are refuting. Herbivores do have HCl in their stomach.

Frosty McSnowballs · 28-10-2013 08:22PM

I'd eat myself if I was made of meat.

The One Who Knocks · 28-10-2013 08:24PM

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

Although I agree we are anatomically omnivorous I have to point out that some of your own information is just as factually incorrect as that which you are refuting. Herbivores do have HCl in their stomach.

Sure there's a few exceptions, but it's a general rule, right?

28-10-2013 08:28PM

Jamez735 wrote: »

Sure there's a few exceptions, but it's a general rule, right?

Herbivores have a less acidic pH in their stomachs, but there is HCl there.

(This could be totally wrong, but I think human stomach pH is actually closer to herbivore average than carnivore average).

Miss Lockhart · 28-10-2013 08:28PM

Jamez735 wrote: »

Sure there's a few exceptions, but it's a general rule, right?

No. Ruminants, horses, rabbits etc. They all secrete HCl in their stomach.

The One Who Knocks · 28-10-2013 08:32PM

true-or-false wrote: »

Herbivores have a less acidic pH in their stomachs, but there is HCl there.

(This could be totally wrong, but I think human stomach pH is actually closer to herbivore average than carnivore average).

Fair enough, but there's still the fact that we don't have cellulase which is a major differentiator.

Miss Lockhart · 28-10-2013 08:32PM

true-or-false wrote: »

Herbivores have a less acidic pH in their stomachs, but there is HCl there.

(This could be totally wrong, but I think human stomach pH is actually closer to herbivore average than carnivore average).

pH of human stomach, ruminant abomasum, lion stomach, horse stomach is average of 2. ( It can vary by region in equine stomach though)

Pumpkinseeds · 28-10-2013 08:34PM

People would be a lot healthier if they just ate a little less meat each week. It's easy enough to replace meat with fish and to have something like a veggie lasagne once a week. It's a very simple lifestyle change that could have a positive impact on health. Whatever, it's a personal choice, I prefer a pescetarian diet.

sok2005 · 28-10-2013 08:37PM

Whether we are omnivores or otherwise, humans have the choice to abstain from eating meat. We can survive well without it, and we can supplement it nowadays easily. It all depends on your comfort level.

I am pie · 28-10-2013 08:38PM

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

People would be a lot healthier if they just ate a little less meat each week. It's easy enough to replace meat with fish and to have something like a veggie lasagne once a week. It's a very simple lifestyle change that could have a positive impact on health. Whatever, it's a personal choice, I prefer a pescetarian diet.

I think a reduction in sugar would make more difference than a reduction in meat.

Personal choice I suppose.

The Backwards Man · 28-10-2013 08:40PM

If I heeded the advice of every crazy internet person on what I should and shouldn't eat I'd have starved to death years ago. I follow a diet that the very first humans followed and it hasn't killed me yet. It is very simple;

1. I eat things I like

2. I don't eat things I don't like.

mrsoundie · 28-10-2013 08:51PM

Can we eat the next person who starts a thread with "Blankety Blank too much meat diet yadda yadda yadda".

food for thought

Comments