On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 20:16:01 -0400, rick etter wrote:
> "Creature" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 23:08:24 GMT, wowfabgroovy wrote:
>> > is there a reason why most/all food animals are naturally herbivorous?
>> > i know people eat dogs in some countries, but are there any other
>> > naturally carnivorous animals that are used for food?
>>
>> I'd say food chain issues make keeping carnivourous animals for food even
>> more wasteful. Energy is lost, the further up the food chain you go -
>> Feeding a cow a ton of veggies than eating it will give you less energy
>> than eating the veggies yourself, as some of the energy in the veggies has
>> gone into the cow moving, breathing, circulating blood etc.
>====================
> Really? How well do you process grass? I'd say you're lying. there is no
> way that you can convert grass to protein to keep yourself alive.
> A cow can and does just that, and makes for a delicious steak when done...

Normally I have you killfiled, and it's posts like this that make me
realise why. Really, come on now. Think this through. We're talking GCSE
biology here, it's not that complex.
The point is not that a cow can or cannot process grass better than I can
(of course it can). The point is that the more stages in the food chain
there are, the smaller the amount of the original energy remains. All
energy comes from the sun; filter that energy as sun -> plant -> you and
you'll get x energy. Filter it as sun -> plant -> animal -> you, and
you'll get less energy, as the animal will have used some to heat its
body, move around, moo, think, respire, etc.

--
Alex Pounds (Creature) .~. LGBTSoc Comms Person
CS2 Student /V\ Website working group chair
// \\ Environmental committee member
"Variables won't; Constants aren't" /( )\
^`~'^