Another ignorant troll.

"Autymn D. C." > wrote in message oups.com...
> pearl wrote:
> > "Autymn D. C." > wrote in message oups.com...
> > > pearl wrote:
> > > > * The greater the variety of plant-based foods in the diet, the greater
> > > > the benefit. Variety insures broader coverage of known and unknown
> > > > nutrient needs.
> > >
> > > a tautology
> >
> > I don't see any.
>
> You would if you understood your own words.

Show where.

> > > > * Provided there is plant food variety, quality and quantity, a
> > > > healthful and nutritionally complete diet can be attained without
> > > > animal-based food.
> > >
> > > a tautology--
> >
> > No.
>
> Yes.

Show where.

> > > one can live healthily for many months on an all-meat
> > > diet, as well.
> >
> > Ipse dixit, and false. Even truly carnivorous animals
> > like dogs cannot live healthily for long on meat alone.
>
> You proven liar, dogs are omnivores; cats are carnivores.

No. You're a proven ignoramus.

'The order Carnivora includes the cat, hyena, bear,
weasel, seal, mongoose, civet and dog families ..'
http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/wayne2.htm

> And bones
> and marrow are a meat, so your blurb is irrelevant.

You're making up definitions to suit yourself.

meat
n.
1. The edible flesh of animals, especially that of
mammals as opposed to that of fish or poultry.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=meat

flesh ( P ) Pronunciation Key (flsh)
n.
1. The soft tissue of the body of a vertebrate, covering the
bones and consisting mainly of skeletal muscle and fat.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=flesh

Bone marrow is not 'flesh', it is called 'bone marrow'.
Likewise for bones. Bones are not referred to as 'meat'.

> > Even Atkins 'dieters' are allowed some plant foods, yet;
> >
> > 'Atkins "Nightmare" Diet
>
> This one suffers from my later comment about fat and milk. Go away
> whither you get a brain. I don't uphold Atkins's diet either.

Your later later comment is "Saturated fat is good". Cretin.

> > > > * The closer the food is to its native state - with minimal heating,
> > > > salting and processing - the greater will be the benefit.
> > >
> > > The littler the benefit omnivores such as us
> >
> > Humans are a frugivorous species.
>
> Then why don't some humans eat fruits? Are they not humans, retard?

Which humans don't eat any fruits? Make sure you
back up your inane claims with verifiable evidence.

> Humans are omnivorous.

Ipse dixit and false.

> > > will get therefrom, as
> > > they cannot be as digestible. Why does Moby lisp so much?
> >
> > Humans have teeth with which to crush and pulp food;
> > breaking indigestable plant cell walls, releasing nutrients.
> >
> > And your 'digestible' animal proteins?
>
> Worts would be more digestible if we still had wisdom teeth and
> appendix, but we don't. We moved on from ruminants.

We're on a 60 million year-old branch of frugivorous adaptation.

> > 'A carnivores gastric juice is highly acidic, serving to prevent
> > putrefaction while flesh undergoes digestion. Plant-eaters
>
> Stomach acid is good for killing germs; it's part of immunity to
> botulism and the ilk.

Not all, and putrefactive bacteria are already in the intestines.

> > prior to the flesh putrefying. The human digestive tract is
> > corrugated for the specific purpose of retaining food as long
> > as possible until all nutriment has been extracted, which is the
> > worst possible condition for the digestion and processing of
> > flesh foods. Meat moves quickly through the carnivores
>
> Humans not having ready fangs or spades must deal with less and fewer
> food.

'"less and fewer". -That's- a tautology. It's also nonsense.

> > digestive tract and is quickly expelled. The human lengthy
> > intestine cannot handle low-fiber foods including meat and
> > dairy very quickly at all. As a consequence, animal foods
> > decrease the motility of the human intestine and putrefaction
> > almost invariably occurs (as evidenced by foul smelling stools
> > and flatulence), resulting in the release of many poisonous
> > by-products as the low-fiber food passes through, ever so
> > slowly. In humans, eventual constipation may develop on a
> > meat-centered diet. Colon cancer is also common, both of
> > which are rare or non-existent on a high-fiber diet centered
> > around raw fruits and vegetables.
>
> Putrefaction is done away with by drinking less to have greater acid.

No it isn't. There are many billions of bacteria in the small
intestine and trillions upon trillions in the large intestine.

> Of course, one needn't eat as much flesh as worts to get the same
> nutrition, so gutly backup happens in the overgrown. Inner germs wreak
> many cancers; kill them early and most will be fine.

'The most common species of putrefactive bacteria is
'Escherichia coli'. In the words of Bernard Jensen,
'Escherichia coli likes protein for breakfast, lunch and dinner.'
http://www.wholisticresearch.com/inf....php3?artid=57

> > > > 'Am J Clin Nutr 1999 Sep;70(3 Suppl):532S-538S
> > > > Associations between diet and cancer, ischemic heart disease,
> > > > and all-cause mortality in non-Hispanic white California
> > > [snip]
> >
> > Typical.
>
> Don't cascade.

'Am J Clin Nutr 1999 Sep;70(3 Suppl):532S-538S
Associations between diet and cancer, ischemic heart disease,
and all-cause mortality in non-Hispanic white California
Seventh-day Adventists.
Fraser GE. Center for Health Research and the Department of
Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Loma Linda University, CA USA.

Results associating diet with chronic disease in a cohort of 34192
California Seventh-day Adventists are summarized. Most Seventh-day
Adventists do not smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol, and there is a wide
range of dietary exposures within the population. About 50% of those
studied ate meat products <1 time/wk or not at all, and vegetarians
consumed more tomatoes, legumes, nuts, and fruit, but less coffee,
doughnuts, and eggs than did nonvegetarians. Multivariate analyses
showed significant associations between beef consumption and fatal
ischemic heart disease (IHD) in men [relative risk (RR) = 2.31 for
subjects who ate beef > or =3 times/wk compared with vegetarians],
significant protective associations between nut consumption and fatal
and nonfatal IHD in both sexes (RR approximately 0.5 for subjects
who ate nuts > or =5 times/wk compared with those who ate nuts
<1 time/wk), and reduced risk of IHD in subjects preferring whole-grain
to white bread. The lifetime risk of IHD was reduced by approximately
31% in those who consumed nuts frequently and by 37% in male
vegetarians compared with nonvegetarians. Cancers of the colon and
prostate were significantly more likely in nonvegetarians (RR of 1.88
and 1.54, respectively), and frequent beef consumers also had higher
risk of bladder cancer. Intake of legumes was negatively associated
with risk of colon cancer in nonvegetarians and risk of pancreatic
cancer. Higher consumption of all fruit or dried fruit was associated
with lower risks of lung, prostate, and pancreatic cancers.
Cross-sectional data suggest vegetarian Seventh-day Adventists have
lower risks of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and arthritis than
nonvegetarians. Thus, among Seventh-day Adventists, vegetarians are
healthier than nonvegetarians but this cannot be ascribed only to the
absence of meat.
PMID: 10479227

> > > See the "variety" argument of yours and apply it to meats.

The above is from regular meat consumption.

> > > The diseases come from milk and fat,

But now you say that "Saturated fat is good".

> > There is at least 6% saturated fat content in lean meat.
>
> Saturated fat is good:

"The diseases come from milk and fat,".

> The Truth About Saturated Fat,
> http://www.mercola.com/2002/aug/17/saturated_fat1.htm.

'The most striking results from the analysis were the strong positive
associations between increasing consumption of animal fats and ischemic
heart disease mortality [death rate ratios (and 95% CIs) for the highest
third of intake compared with the lowest third in subjects with no prior
disease were 3.29 (1.50, 7.21) for total animal fat, 2.77 (1.25, 6.13)
for saturated animal fat, and 3.53 (1.57, 7.96) for dietary cholesterol;
P for trend: <0.01, <0.01, and <0.001, respectively]. In contrast, no
protective effects were noted for dietary fiber, fish, or alcohol consumption.
Consumption of eggs and cheese were both positively associated with
ischemic heart disease mortality in these subjects (P for trend, < 0.01
for both foods).
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/70/3/525S

> The health problems most have happen in the poor, who thrive on cheap
> starches and fats (oils in this case). There are pricier but better
> choices in both the fleshly and wortly.

People with health problems thrive?

Meat consumption is associated with disease, period.

> > > and not from /fleshes/.
> >
> > And you call others illiterate? The word is 'flesh'.
>
> The many is "fleshes", dolt.

'Mass nouns are those that cannot be semantically indefinitized
or pluralized (that is, that cannot be used with the indefinite article,
and for which there is no plural form). "Flesh," is a mass term -
we would not say "a flesh," nor "fleshes." A "count" noun, on
the other hand, is a noun that can be used with the indefinite article
and for which there is a plural form. "Dog" is a count noun - we
can say "a dog," or "dogs." Simply put, a count noun is
something that can be counted; a mass term is one that cannot.
We can count dogs but not flesh. '
http://www.forananswer.org/John/Jn1_1.htm

> > > I hear that buffalo is lean and good...
> >
> > 'According to Harper's Biochemistry, the putrefaction bacteria
> > in the large intestine convert amino acids from undigested protein
> (rebutted bacteria argument)

Absolutely not.

> (snipped robotic output)

Predictable evasion.

> > http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=parties
>
> -Aut
>