reply to post by PoorFool
'The Omnivore's Dilemma' is a good read. One thing it mentions is how the corn and wheat consumed would feed the world more abundantly than the meat
from the animal eating it. Grass? Sure. The problem is, zea mays is the food of choice, animals that eat corn taste better than animals that eat
grass. You are what you eat applies to cows too.
Your response to my remark about global warming came from misunderstanding. I do not hold global warming to be true, but what I was saying is that the
greenhouse gasses which those who believe say cause global warming, come more from animal waste. Is that animal caused global warming? Sort of, but
it's still man-made because it is man that is working to mass-produce these animals. The reasons cow waste and flatulance puts so much greenhouse gas
into the air is because of the massive quantity of them.
Third, you say how nature intends for us to eat meat and veggies. That's true in several ways, but realize that it's not meat it's protein, iron,
vitamin B-12. You can get lots of this from animal produced products, plus except for B-12, there are oodles of other sources. How did we come to
think that our only source of protein was meat? Indeed we have the teeth and capabilities to consume both meats and veggies, but that's a survival
thing, not a must. What I mean here is, in a survival situation where you have nothing but animals, you had better eat that animal, and since humans
are the great adapters, their systems allow it. Are there things in animal products that we must have? Yes. Are there things in vegetable and fruit
products we must have? Yes. That is why we are omnivores, there are vitamins and nutrients in those which we need. However, when you come into a
civilized era that understands why, we can make adjustments. For instance, protein is found in much more than just meat, same with iron and calcium.
B-12 can be found in cheese and milk and vogurt and eggs and so on, without needing to kill the animals. Because we understand why, there is no reason
why we can't make decisions for preference. Just as you prefer to eat meat, I prefer not to. Depending on the other factors of how you eat, I may be
healthier or less healthy than you.
It's in our genes to get the vitamins and nutrients to survive and in our past, our knowledge was that you must eat meat and veggies. We now know that
it's more complicated than just food, but what's in the food. If you know why your supposed to eat a certain type of food, you can accomidate with
other food choices. There is very little in meat which cannot be replaced by something that is not meat.
I'm not trying to attack your credibility, I don't know how credible you are, I'm only responding to your post.
Your saying that meat in general has no contribution to obesity, cholesterol and so on? If not, let me know, it wasn't a clear message to read. If so,
how can you say that? Chicken and fish, sure, they are a ton more healthy. But red meats, bacon, ham, ect?
It's not a simple topic to discuss and I just want to let you know that I'm not attacking you or your credibility, I'm simply debating with you. You
didn't have to post all your links, I can go search for myself. I'm sure I'm right in some things and wrong in others just as you are, that's what
makes debating interesting, it's a learning process.
Until next time,
P.S. I just want to bring up another thing. Many vegetarians and vegans change their diet for philosophical and moral reasoning, not health. If you
disagree with them, that's fine. But, you have got to admit that sacraficing foods you might love to eat for a certain moral reason is admirable
whether you believe in the moral reason or not.
edit on 22-1-2011 by TheGoodDoctor because: (no reason given)