Larry wrote:
> "usual suspect" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>>I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
>>>types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
>>>consumption, I abstain.
>>
>>What "ill effects"?
>
> The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is

Effects *ARE*, you fruity oaf.

> well known in the
> scientific/medical literature,

Larry, does the literature you've selectively chosen for your dumb
website focus on generalized consumption of meat, overconsumption of
meat, or does it take into account moderate consumption of recommended
portion sizes? You're not much of a scientist if you focus only on
studies that demonstrate what overconsumption of meat can do, because I
can find studies of overconsumption of numerous other foods, including
foods high in sugar.

Compare apples to apples: find some studies which include moderate
intake of lean meats -- red, white, fish, doesn't matter so long as
they're lean, although consumption of fish and wild game has shown
reduced incidence of heart disease, lower LDL and triglyceride levels,
etc. -- and compare those to some kind of "vegan" control if you want.
You'll find no significant health differences among those who consume
*healthy* diets, whether they contain meat or not. Meat isn't the evil
you claim it to be, overconsumption is. And meat eaters aren't alone
when it comes to risks of overconsumption: see Derek Nash -- an utterly
undisciplined 250 pound "vegan."

http://www.cnn.com/FOOD/news/9906/28/red.meat.study/
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/...ies/s60363.htm
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...?oneclick=true

> if willfully not by the anti-veg*n hate
> mongers.

You conveniently left out the vegan misanthropes and hate mongers, but
why should you single yourself out.