Humans are naturally plant-eaters

Originally posted by Spirit Warrior 11:11
reply to post by The_Zomar

 

I would love to see any documentation of the research they did to come to those conclusions. Not because I disagree, but because I would find it interesting the testing and/or research they used. Insurance companies are in the business to make money first and foremost and I assume they did not make those policy changes 'lightly'.

Me too, I just started looking to see if I can find those studies.

Some other interesting information I have found along the way:

Studies have repeatedly demonstrated that a plant-based diet can substantially lower the risk of developing the diseases that are most lethal and most costly to insurers; namely, cancer, hypertension, heart disease, and obesity. It stands to reason, then, that vegetarians live six to ten years longer than meat-eaters, on average.

The American Dietetic Association reports that vegetarians have lower cholesterol levels
Vegetarians are 50% less likely to develop heart disease
Vegetarians have 40% of the cancer rate of meat-eaters
Meat-eaters are nine times more likely to be obese than vegans
A Harvard study indicated that regular meat consumption increases the risk of colon cancer by 300%
The consumption of red meat has been linked to the development of type II diabetes

Prescription Drug Savings
The most commonly prescribed drugs in the U.S. are anti-depressants, but antihypertensives, or high blood pressure medications, are a close second. Indeed, 113 million prescriptions are written for blood pressure medications each year in this country. Many of these drugs are available in name-brand form only, which means the co-pays can quickly become unaffordable. If you don’t have adequate prescription drug coverage, the costs become even more prohibitive. Moreover, four of the twenty best-selling drugs in the country are either related to coronary artery disease, high cholesterol, hypertension, or diabetes. Research has shown that vegetarianism can prevent or ameliorate all of these diseases, and a plant-based diet is undoubtedly cheaper than sky-high co-pays and prescription drug costs.

Read more about that here

Vegetarian diets can prevent and actually reverse diabetes:

Preventing and Reversing Diabetes

Non-insulin-dependent (adult-onset) diabetes can be better controlled and sometimes even eliminated through a low-fat, vegetarian diet along with regular exercise.26 Such a diet, low in fat and high in fiber and complex carbohydrates, allows insulin to work more effectively. The diabetic person can more easily regulate glucose levels. While a vegetarian diet cannot eliminate the need for insulin in people with type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes, it can often reduce the amounts of insulin used. Some scientists believe that insulin-dependent diabetes may be caused by an auto-immune reaction to dairy proteins.

And I thought this was neat:

World-renowned figures as diverse as philosophers Plato and Nietzsche, political leaders Benjamin Franklin and Gandhi, and pop icons Paul McCartney and Bob Marley have all advocated a vegetarian diet. Science is also on the side of vegetarianism. Multitudes of studies have demonstrated the remarkable health benefits of a vegetarian diet.

Originally posted by Vandalour
*snip*

Sometimes I wonder why we slaughter other living creatures and eat their flesh, im thinking of stopping eating meat completely... sometimes when eating a tasty burger it hits me that im eating a corpse

michaelbluejay.com...

A fair look at the evidence shows that humans are optimized for eating plant foods, according to the best evidence: our bodies. We're most similar to other herbivores, and drastically different from carnivores and true omnivores.1,2,3 The science shows that the more meat we eat, the sicker we get -- heart disease, cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis, and every other major degenerative disease. If eating meat were so natural, it wouldn't destroy our health.

Warning: The following video contains extremely graphic scenes.

* Our so-called "canine teeth" are "canine" in name only. Other plant-eaters (like gorillas, horses, and hippos) have "canines", and chimps, who are almost exclusively vegan, have massive canines compared to ours.

* Our early ancestors from at least four million years ago were almost exclusively vegetarian.

* Our omnivorism means we're capable of eating meat (useful from a survival standpoint if that's all that's available), but our bodies aren't geared for it to be a normal, significant part of our diets.

* The animals most similar to us, the other primates, eat an almost exclusively vegan diet (and their main non-plant food often isn't meat, it's termites). Our teeth, saliva, stomach acid, and intestines are most similar to other plant-eaters, and dissimilar to carnivores and true omnivores.

* Among animals, plant-eaters have the longest lifespans, and humans are certainly in that category (and yes, this was true even before modern medicine).

* We sleep about the same amount of time as other herbivores, and less than carnivores and true omnivores.

* The most common cause of choking deaths is eating meat. (source) Real carnivores and omnivores don't have that problem.

Kenneth G. Williams - Vegan Bodybuilder

edit on 21-1-2011 by Vandalour because: (no reason given)

Mod Edit: Removed extreme graphic image. Also added warning before video.

edit on 1/22/2011 by maria_stardust because: (no reason given)

edit on 1/22/2011 by maria_stardust because: (no reason given)

www.youtube.com...

Chimps are not exclusively vegan.

Originally posted by Vandalour

Sometimes I wonder why we slaughter other living creatures and eat their flesh, im thinking of stopping eating meat completely... sometimes when eating a tasty burger it hits me that im eating a corpse

michaelbluejay.com...

A fair look at the evidence shows that humans are optimized for eating plant foods, according to the best evidence: our bodies. We're most similar to other herbivores, and drastically different from carnivores and true omnivores.1,2,3 The science shows that the more meat we eat, the sicker we get -- heart disease, cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis, and every other major degenerative disease. If eating meat were so natural, it wouldn't destroy our health.

Let's break this statement down shall we?

Heart disease: Heart disease is caused by eating meat? Not by the preparation of the meat or other foods served with it? You're positive through your research and study that eating a BALANCED MODERATE amount of meat is not preferred? chinese-school.netfirms.com...

Cancer: Cancer is caused by eating meat? You certain that cancer is not caused by carcinogens? www.mcnallyinstitute.com... Maybe you're talking about the recent study that found eating a serving of red meat a day can double the risk of breast cancer in woman? Not proven. merely a single study. More studies find carcinogens are the main cause of cancer. All else is speculation to date.

Diabetes: Diabetes is caused by eating meat? Are you seriously saying diabetes may be caused by meat?

Eating too much of Carbohydrates, fats, proteins, are all harmful to the body. Our body in general needs a balanced diet to produce energy for performing vital functions.

So again, are you sure eating a BALANCED MODERATE diet including meat can cause diabetes?

Osteoporosis: Osteoporosis is caused by eating meat? You know it's strange. All modern medical science says you are way off base.

What’s the most common cause of osteoporosis? "In general, it's estrogen deficiency in women," says Paul Mystkowski, MD, an endocrinologist at Virginia Mason Medical Center in Seattle and clinical faculty member of the University of Washington in Seattle. Bone loss accelerates after menopause, when older women have a quick drop in estrogen. Over time, the risk of osteoporosis and fracture increases as older women lose more bone than they replace.

Any excessive acid byproduct is only caused by eating to much meat. Again... The source of disease is moderation, not the meat itself

What does a "Moderate" balanced diet including meat cause? Nothing bad. It causes you to be healthy.

The main underlying factor in most the diseases you listed is people not being moderate in what they eat. A cheeseburger from McDonalds once a week will cause you no harm. It's a McDonalds breakfest, followed with a taco bell lunch, and a re-heated pizza dinner 3 days a week that cause problems.

Moderation is the cure to all these diseases.

It's odd that, vegans have a lack of balance? This is from a vegan mind you. www.livestrong.com...

So what is the brass tax here folks? Well sorry to put it so bluntly but really we have known it for a long time. The bible said it best en.wikipedia.org...

It's all energy. energy that our body absorbs in different forms. You choose to eat veggies. Good for you! It is NOT more healthy. Eating meat is NOT less healthy. You are WRONG, and I can say that with the facts to back it.

Sorry to rant, just getting really sick and tired of being more healthy then every vegan I meat (ha) and being told by them how I am at risk.

P.S. I should note that I've known 2 vegans very personally, and they ate all the big protein beans, took vitamins for zinc etc, and they were still constantly sick with colds. They agree their choice of diet is less healthy.

reply to post by Ciphor


This is a complete waste of a post. #1 you are comparing to vegans which is moronic to begin with.

Shall we break down YOUR post now? No, waste of time for me and everyone else. You will have to break down the diet of NORMAL people who eat NORMAL foods in AVERAGE portions. You are not doing that so your data is useless.

Does the average person eat a 'moderate' amount of anything? If you think the answer is yes you are wasting your own time even. The answer is NO they do not. Obesity is a huge problem at the moment. Heart disease is a huge problem and so is cancer. Do you actually believe this would be true if people had moderation in mind? If people actually had any clue what a recommended portion size is? No it would not.

Can you name some places people frequently dine at that have the actual recommended portion sizes and variety? If yes I will be impressed and likely will have to see that for myself because in general it is non-existent.

Now if you are done with your crackpot science quoting extremes in either direction....seriously, you cannot compare vegans and in the same comparison claim that meat eaters carefully portion their meals and eat the right kinds of meat. This is not a comparison based on reality.

If you want a real comparison you MUST compare Lacto-ovo to the average meat eaters diet (not some nutritionists designer diet with meat). Lacto-ovo is by far the most common veg-head and that would be your baseline comparator to the average meat-head.

Bottom line...if you compare the reality of these two the healthier is the lacto-ovo every time!!
And this is not a contest. Fine, you can google articles like anyone else here, but compare apples to apples will ya. If I owned a raw health food store and ate the best, freshest, nutritionally dense variety of raw veggies, dairy, and eggs and then seriously tried to compare myself to the average fast food eater I think you would have an issue with that comparison as well.

reply to post by The_Zomar


Great references. Too bad the others in the thread just ignore whats right in their face.
Do you happen to have links to your sources? I find the comparisons of disease to be very interesting.

It's also important to note that there are some extremely helpful veggie-fruit diets which are proven to help treat disease patients. Recovery is aided by a huge factor. Some types of cancer are proven to go into remission from some form of these diets. Also symptoms can be addressed with these diets. Not all forms of disease can be cured from food but the symptoms and recovery for most diseases are greatly aided by it. This is due to the huge support the immune system receives from these diet types.

Everyone here should know that it is all chemistry in the end. Food IS medicine. That is why, just like medicine, it can help a great deal or knock you off your rocker.

reply to post by Spirit Warrior 11:11


That's due to training. But I'm sure that if no training was applied, a human in the wild would resort to eating animals along with whatever safe and edible plants he could find.

We are not naturally plant eaters, we are omnivores. Fruit and veg should take up a large chunk of your diet with meat making up the rest for a balanced healthy diet... of course sometimes consuming large amounts of meat is preferred, but that depends on the situation you find yourself in. As always good quality meat is what you want.

Originally posted by windwaker
reply to post by Spirit Warrior 11:11

 

That's due to training. But I'm sure that if no training was applied, a human in the wild would resort to eating animals along with whatever safe and edible plants he could find.

I cannot disagree with that. You are right on for the average Joe.

However (comma) the truth is there is more forage material readily available. So the answer is not that easy. If we were to be talking about the most available food sources then more than likely they are plants, fungi, and bugs. Animals are around also but less available relatively. It also depends on where you are but in general I think that's fairly accurate.

If you are in the SH, best not turn your nose up at any food source. You would be foolish. I think it would also be foolish to NOT learn what food sources could very well be right in your face. No reason to suffer while you are trying to catch that squirrel for dinner.

reply to post by Ciphor


You obviously don't know there are carcinogens in meat.

You are 160% more likely to develop cancer if you eat meat.

150% more likely to develop heart disease if you eat meat.

Meat consumption increases risk of colon cancer 300%

Eating meat decreases your life span by up to 10 years as I posted earlier.
Same source I posted earlier that you failed to read
Or maybe you ignored it, either way, looks like you need to research before talking.

Originally posted by Solomons
We are not naturally plant eaters, we are omnivores. Fruit and veg should take up a large chunk of your diet with meat making up the rest for a balanced healthy diet... of course sometimes consuming large amounts of meat is preferred, but that depends on the situation you find yourself in. As always good quality meat is what you want.

edit on 26-1-2011 by Solomons because: (no reason given)

This is the debate and I don't tend to agree with your assessment. The human mechanism has a far easier time with veggies, fruits, grains, eggs...then fish...then dairy... red meat and white meat is by far the hardest on the system. Again, it is conditioning. There is never any rejection or allergens going on in the body with those items. Meat is a different story. The body WILL reject and have allergic reactions to meats. That goes for dairy as well but to a much lesser degree. Fish s generally not a problem either.

I don't know where you get that sometimes we need large amounts of meat I think that is a very unbelievable statement. Good quality ANYTHING is what you want so...by quality I hope you mean organic. Then we are agreeing on one thing at least.

reply to post by Spirit Warrior 11:11


Posters in this thread need to immediately cease all generalisation. Some people have dietary complaints linked to meat and dairy , but others have the same problem with vegetables.
Personaly I have massive issues with digesting plant matter in general, not least of which is an inability to derive any energy from them. Please cease your generalisation .

reply to post by Spirit Warrior 11:11


Um. Plant alergies are not unheard of and are in fact rather common.

The top 8 food alergies.

• Milk
  
• Eggs
  
• Peanuts
  
• Tree nuts (such as almonds, cashews, walnuts)
  
• Fish (such as bass, cod, flounder)
  
• Shellfish (such as crab, lobster, shrimp)
  
• Soy
  
• Wheat

source

Oh and Food Intolerances, far more common with plants.

Reactions to chemical components of the diet are more common than true food allergies.[citation needed] They are caused by various organic chemicals occurring naturally in a wide variety of foods, both of animal and vegetable origin more often than to food additives, preservatives, colourings and flavourings, such as sulfites or dyes. Both natural and artificial ingredients may cause adverse reactions in sensitive people if consumed in sufficient amount, the degree of sensitivity varying between individuals.

Pharmacological responses to naturally occurring compounds in food, or chemical intolerance, can occur in individuals from both allergic and non-allergic family backgrounds. Symptoms may begin at any age, and may develop quickly or slowly. Triggers may range from a viral infection or illness to environmental chemical exposure. It occurs more commonly in women, which may be because of hormone differences, as many food chemicals mimic hormones.

A deficiency in digestive enzymes can also cause some types of food intolerances. Lactose intolerance is a result of the body not producing sufficient lactase to digest the lactose in milk; dairy foods which are lower in lactose, such as cheese, are less likely to trigger a reaction in this case. Another carbohydrate intolerance caused by enzyme deficiency is hereditary fructose intolerance.

Celiac disease, an autoimmune disorder caused by an immune response to the protein gluten, results in gluten intolerance and can lead to temporary lactose intolerance.

The most widely distributed naturally occurring food chemical capable of provoking reactions is salicylate,[18] although tartrazine and benzoic acid are well recognised in susceptible individuals.Benzoates and salicylates occur naturally in many different foods, including fruits, juices, vegetables, spices, herbs, nuts, tea, wines, and coffee. Salicylate sensitivity causes reactions to not only aspirin and NSAIDs but also foods in which salicylates naturally occur, such as cherries.

Other natural chemicals which commonly cause reactions and cross reactivity include amines, nitrates, sulphites and some antioxidants. Chemicals involved in aroma and flavour are often suspect.
The classification or avoidance of foods based on botanical families bears no relationship to their chemical content and is not relevant in the management of food intolerance.

Salicylate-containing foods include apples, citrus fruits, strawberries, tomatoes, and wine, while reactions to chocolate, cheese, bananas, avocado, tomato or wine point to amines as the likely food chemical. Thus exclusion of single foods does not necessarily identify the chemical responsible as several chemicals can be present in a food, the patient may be sensitive to multiple food chemicals and reaction more likely to occur when foods containing the triggering substance are eaten in a combined quantity that exceeds the patient's sensitivity thresholds. People with food sensitivities have different sensitivity thresholds, and so more sensitive people will react to much smaller amounts of the substance.

source

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


Of course there are people with plant allergies. People can be allergic to anything. These are no the norm or the mean or the average .....get the point. I can go to point out every hole in anyones statements because there is no way to account for everyone out there. There are always exceptions to the rule. Your statement is pointless because it is obvious to everyone there are always exceptions.

Originally posted by Spirit Warrior 11:11
reply to post by windwaker

 

I can say for a fact that I would be just fine. However I would have to give credit to my military survival training. I would not necessarily have to eat meat then either. I actually believe those around me would be happy as clams to follow me and find out what edible items are all around us. I would definitely eat fish as much as possible though because of the high protein and especially the fat content. Bugs would be on the list as well.

I think a veg-head would out-survive a regular meat-head. Meat is much MUCH harder to acquire in a SHTF scenario. Unless we bring firearms etc into the mix. Then you still have problems when you have no more ammunition.

Best bet would be to find a good fisherman though truly.

i have to disagree, i seen many shows on survival and all of the comentators have said that plants will keep you alive but you burn so many extra calories in a survival situation that you would just not have the energy needed to make it out on plants alone. you would need to have some kind of protein to give you the sustained energy to make it out of a survival situation

i have to disagree, i seen many shows on survival and all of the comentators have said that plants will keep you alive but you burn so many extra calories in a survival situation that you would just not have the energy needed to make it out on plants alone. you would need to have some kind of protein to give you the sustained energy to make it out of a survival situation

We don't use protein in that way. Protein is not used for energy. Not efficiently anyway. Protein is generally used to repair and recovery. You want fat and carbohydrates for energy. Fruit is immediate energy, Carbs from plants is also quickly utilized. You hope that you have enough calories coming in that you don't start burning through your protein. That creates byproducts in the body as well which requires fresh water to flush. Bad scenario that could be unavoidable but the more intake you have the less likely you are to start burning through your protein.

Some veggies are low in calories. True statement. Some are loaded with calories and fat. True statement. Nuts are a fantastic source of energy from fat, calories and protein. Did you know that you cannot live of of protein? If you were to be stranded and all there was on your little island were rabbits you would soon die. Protein poisoning. However, you cannot eat too many veggies. Maybe if all you had were carrots you may have issues but generally everywhere you go there are a ton of plant varieties. I have to base on reality. There are always exceptions but you have to think what is generally the case in any given environment.

I seriously hope you are not trying to debate me on survival based on watching some TV show. I have actual training living in the bush for a month straight while being instructed by the best in the world. I don't mid relaying what I've learned but don't disagree because you saw something in a movie or on TV. Also, the survival shows on TV are actually quite good I don't argue that. I especially like Bear. We went through very similar training.

Originally posted by Spirit Warrior 11:11

i have to disagree, i seen many shows on survival and all of the comentators have said that plants will keep you alive but you burn so many extra calories in a survival situation that you would just not have the energy needed to make it out on plants alone. you would need to have some kind of protein to give you the sustained energy to make it out of a survival situation

We don't use protein in that way. Protein is not used for energy. Not efficiently anyway. Protein is generally used to repair and recovery. You want fat and carbohydrates for energy. Fruit is immediate energy, Carbs from plants is also quickly utilized. You hope that you have enough calories coming in that you don't start burning through your protein. That creates byproducts in the body as well which requires fresh water to flush. Bad scenario that could be unavoidable but the more intake you have the less likely you are to start burning through your protein.

Some veggies are low in calories. True statement. Some are loaded with calories and fat. True statement. Nuts are a fantastic source of energy from fat, calories and protein. Did you know that you cannot live of of protein? If you were to be stranded and all there was on your little island were rabbits you would soon die. Protein poisoning. However, you cannot eat too many veggies. Maybe if all you had were carrots you may have issues but generally everywhere you go there are a ton of plant varieties. I have to base on reality. There are always exceptions but you have to think what is generally the case in any given environment.

I seriously hope you are not trying to debate me on survival based on watching some TV show. I have actual training living in the bush for a month straight while being instructed by the best in the world. I don't mid relaying what I've learned but don't disagree because you saw something in a movie or on TV. Also, the survival shows on TV are actually quite good I don't argue that. I especially like Bear. We went through very similar training.

edit on 27-1-2011 by Spirit Warrior 11:11 because: (no reason given)

i don't know what training you claim to have; i could claim to have trained with the best in the world also. most items found in a survivial situation are going to be green leafy ( not much fat or carbs), insects, and then meat. it you are lucky enough to be to be in a survival situation and there is a walnut grove and the walnuts are in season well then you are right; you would expended a lot less energy grabing a few nuts then fishing or hunting to survive. once agian i don't care what you eat the less meat you eat the more for me. and i am not trying to debate you on survival based on just watching bear grilles on tv i have plenty of my own experience. graze on warrior graze on

Well i don't know much about survival, but Ray Mears is quite adamant that it's impossible to survive in the wild without eating meat, and he knows his stuff to put it lightly. So unless you live in one of the most biodiverse areas of the world that is like that all year round...i think meat is a necessity.

Originally posted by The_Zomar
reply to post by Ciphor

 

You obviously don't know there are carcinogens in meat.

There are also carcinogens in the air that we breath. Should we stop breathing, then? And there are not carcinogens in every meat; only in meat that involves industrial production and processing.

Originally posted by The_Zomar
You are 160% more likely to develop cancer if you eat meat.

I think that depends what kind of meat you eat; if you have access to meat from animals that were not fed garbage, the percentage goes down significantly, IMHO.

Originally posted by The_Zomar
150% more likely to develop heart disease if you eat meat.

It's not the meat and again not even any meat. It's red meat, because it contains a high percentage of fat. What causes heart diseases is the fat, not the meat itself. That is why it is preferable to eat white meat (chickens, fish etc.), because the fat percentage is much lower. And it's not even eating red meat alone; it's a combination of eating fatty food and not getting enough exercise. I bet the percentage you quoted would be much-much lower, if we could live a life with a lot of exercise.

Originally posted by The_Zomar
Eating meat decreases your life span by up to 10 years as I posted earlier.

As I said, that's actually not true; it applies at most only to red meat. And then only in combination with living in polluted cities and leading a life with hardly any exercise. As others have said the archaeological evidence shows that we were always omnivores.

Originally posted by WalterRatlos
There are also carcinogens in the air that we breath. Should we stop breathing, then? And there are not carcinogens in every meat; only in meat that involves industrial production and processing.

I was replying to a poster that said cancer comes from carcinogens; therefor meat doesn't produce cancer. I never said meat was the only source of carcinogens.

Originally posted by WalterRatlos

Originally posted by The_Zomar
You are 160% more likely to develop cancer if you eat meat.

I think that depends what kind of meat you eat; if you have access to meat from animals that were not fed garbage, the percentage goes down significantly, IMHO.

Most people don't have access to 100% pure cow. Even if they did, it merely lowers the percentage. Not eliminate it; furthering my point.

Originally posted by WalterRatlos

Originally posted by The_Zomar
150% more likely to develop heart disease if you eat meat.

It's not the meat and again not even any meat. It's red meat

The study was done vegetarians vs. omnivores. I can guarantee they did not consume red meat exclusively, as no omnivore does.

Originally posted by WalterRatlos

Originally posted by The_Zomar
Eating meat decreases your life span by up to 10 years as I posted earlier.

As I said, that's actually not true; it applies at most only to red meat. And then only in combination with living in polluted cities and leading a life with hardly any exercise. As others have said the archaeological evidence shows that we were always omnivores.

Again, you are assuming that the omnivores in the studies ate exclusively red meat.

Assuming that the vegetarians in the study are not subjected to the same polluted cities and lack of exercise is just plain not-thinking. Do you think that vegetarians live in some utopia, free of pollution where everyone exercises the recommended amount every day?

reply to post by Spirit Warrior 11:11


I provided medical source links proving what I say to be correct. You do nothing to target any source material. Just call it crack pot science. You are great at debating... hahahaha.

At no point did I use the word "normal". So why are you acting as though I did? Title of thread is we aren't meant to eat meat. I was simply debating that. What is this "what normal people eat" crap you are saying?

At no point was I referencing what the average person choices to eat, and I really don't see how individuals choices on health are related to the topic of "we are not meant to eat meat". They can eat whatever they want. You want to control and direct that? You like dictators? Hmmm.

You sound angry, I see aggression in your post. Know what I do not see? I single shred of supporting evidence to your claims. Not 1 link to any source material with credibility. Just half baked insults.

You are like most people I speak with who have your sentiments on this issue. You are full of rage and pseudo science with no evidence. When someone questions you with facts and proof of how eating meat without excess is perfectly healthy, and points out the fact that your health ailments are caused by a lack of self control, you get enraged.

What a shock hahah