View Single Post
  #17 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to soc.culture.indian,aus.politics,nz.politics,alt.food.vegan,rec.food.veg
harmony harmony is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default why we should all turn vegetarian

the health insurance companies should lower the premium of veggie guys by
40pct and tag a 50pct meat surcahrge.
just like they treat smoking.


"Beach Runner" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> rick wrote:
>> "Beach Runner" > wrote in message
>> ups.com...
>> >
>> > rick wrote:
>> >> "Beach Runner" > wrote in message
>> >> oups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > Arthur Brain wrote:
>> >> >> nemo wrote:>
>> >> >> As part of a balanced, and varied diet, my beef will allow
>> >> >> me
>> >> >> to grow
>> >> >> strong, while you vegans grow stunted, pale and pasty with
>> >> >> poor
>> >> >> eyesight and thin brittle bones.
>> >> >

> That's the first silly statement. Poor eyesight, pale, pasty,
> eyesight.
> That's absurd.
>
>
>> >> > Your beef will increase cardio vascular disease,
>> >> > osteoperosis,
>> >> > cancer
>> >> > of the colon, lacks any fiber, is pumped full of
>> >> > hormones,many
>> >> > with
>> >> > antibitotics,
>> >> > and wasting much energy and especially water. Growing and
>> >> > rendering a
>> >> > cow
>> >> > uses enough water to float a battleship.
>> >> ===============================
>> >> Actually, NO to all your claims above fool.
>> >>
>> >> Tell us about all the wasted water especially. I'm anxious to
>> >> hear that particular ly from you...
>> >>
>> > Sir, perhaps you might start to do the arithmetic.

>> ================
>> Idiot, you might first learn a thing or two...
>>
>>
>> First you have
>> > all the water requirements to grow for 12 times as much produce
>> > as if people simply ate the produce.

>> =============================
>> "produce?" Fed to cattle? What a hoot!!! Show me any
>> requirement to feed "produce" to beef cattle...

>
> Most of the corn grown in America is feed to cattle. Cattle is a
> produce.
>
>> Then, again, give me the numbers for this extrme amount of
>> 'wasted' water. Why can't you do that?
>>
>>
>>
>> Then you have to supply the
>> > water to the cattle. Not a huge amount. The a huge amount
>> > of water is required to render the animal.

>> =======================
>> ROTFLMAO
>>

> If you'd like the data from a non biased source, simply go to
> http://wrrc.p2pays.org/p2rx/subsecti...TOKEN=71483890
>
> This is from professional documentation on the Waste Reduction Resource
> Center.
>
> "Meat Processing Water Consumption: Like many other food processing
> activities, the necessity for hygiene and quality control in meat
> processing results in high water usage and consequently high wastewater
> generation. Volumes of wastewater from meat processing are generally
> 80-95 percent of the total freshwater consumption (MRC, 1995). The
> United Nations Environmental Program, Cleaner Production Assessment in
> Meat Processing (2000), estimates a range of 1,100 to 4,400 gallons of
> water are used per live weight ton of slaughtered animal in the United
> States. Between 44-60 percent of water is consumed in the slaughter,
> evisceration and boning areas (MRC, 1995). The following table
> illustrates the breakdown of water consumption in beef and pork
> processing based on a study of Australian abattoirs."
>
>
>> >
>> > There are many places on the network this can be easily
>> > verified.
>> > Here's one of many URLs.
>> > http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/classes/...es/hunger1.htm

>> ====================
>> Hype and propaganda, fool....
>> Wanna know how I know? This little ly that keeps getting passed
>> on and on by AR/vegan loons without any cite.
>> "...50% of the water withdrawn every year in the US to irrigate
>> crops fed to livestock and to wash away manure..."
>> Here's a site that will expalin water withdrawals in the US to
>> you. It's written for school children, but you should be able to
>> follow along...
>> http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/totpie95.html
>>
>> Total irragation, livestock, and aquaculture withdrawals are only
>> about 36%.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Your knowledge of osteoporsis is clearly nil. You might
>> >> > choose
>> >> > to read
>> >> > the "Bone Density Diet" by Dr. George Kesller, foremost
>> >> > expert
>> >> > on
>> >> > Osteoporosis.
>> >> > Meat leaches calcium from the cells, and should be eaten
>> >> > sparingly if
>> >> > at all. There is no reason at all the eat meat.
>> >
>> > And of course, you made the claim that beef is somehow good
>> > for osteoporosis. I suggest you might want to read
>> > the Bone Density Diet, by Dr. George Kessler, the foremost
>> > expert on Osteoporosis. He provides all the equations.
>> >
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> > This ignored that suffering of factory manufactured cattle.
>> >> ===================
>> >> Why do you ignore the far more brutal, inhumane deaths that
>> >> aniomals suffer in the factory-farming of your veggies,
>> >> hypocrite?
>> >>
>> >
>> > That's a silly argument. Of course there are collateral
>> > damages.
>> > But you only need to eat a fraction of the produce necessary.
>> > In any
>> > case, mechanized production of harvesting is not the same as
>> > taking
>> > animals and using them as products.

>> ============================
>> Really? Why not fool? Aren't they just as dead? Why does the
>> method of their death matter so much to you? Why does the
>> disposition of the bodies mean so much to you? Why is it that
>> the far more brutal, inhumane deaths that animals experience in
>> factory-farmed veggies mean nothing to you?
>>

> First, the degree is far less. Secondly, all that collateral damage
> would
> occur with production for cattle, only far more. And then there of
> course
> is intention.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Once again, you have failed to address the original error you
>> > posted,
>> > that somehow eating beef avoids osteoporosis. Beef does not
>> > contain anything but trace amounts of
>> > calcium, but large amounts of calcium are required to break it
>> > down.

>> ==========================
>> http://www.mercola.com/2002/feb/16/v...m_myths_05.htm
>>

> Oh your kidding. Mercola? That quack? Next you'll quote Dr.
> Atkinson.
> Of course, you stuck Osteoporosis and Beef into google and you came up
> with Mercola. Big freaking deal.
>
> Do you know anything about how calcium is used in in the body? The
> effect of phosphoric acid and why it effects calcium levels? Just be
> honest.
> Do you understand the relationship of calcium to protein?
>
>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > A quick google search will show some sites which support
>> > eating beef. It's pretty funny to see who supports it.

>> =======================
>> A quick search also does not say to avoid meat altogether...

>
> Who cares if people avoid meat altogether. That's not what I responded
> to. I responded to your statement that eating meat will avoid
> osteoporosis.
>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Frankly, anyone that can't understand that eating food that
>> > requires
>> > 10 to 12 times more produce, drinks water it's entire life, and
>> > is
>> > ignorant
>> > and about the use of water in rendering, (which uses more water
>> > than
>> > the rest put together) lacks the basic understanding to engage
>> > in
>> > anything but emotional diatribes.

>> ============================
>> LOL The ignorance is all yours, fool. I've provided data, now

>
> What data? You provided a pointer to a quack.
>
>> it's YOUR turn to back up some of your ignorant spews and lys.
>> I'll wait... The only one here with nothing but emotional spew
>> is you fool. You've yet to back up your lys and delusions.
>>

> amazing....
>>
>> >
>> > If you can offer some science, let me know. Till them, remain
>> > ignorant.
>> > Enjoy your heart disease. You might want to get a dexa scan
>> > and
>> > see where you really are. Frankly, meat isn't the main cause of
>> > the
>> > huge explosion of osteoporosis, it's drinking soda. But, I'm
>> > sure
>> > you didn't know that.
>> >
>> > Oh yes genius, enjoy eating your "aniomals"

>> =============================
>> LOL I rest my case, you have nothing, killer. Should I now
>> submit all posts to you for spell-checking? At least maybe
>> you'll be useful at something.
>>

> The original discussion was on osteoporosis. The tremendous
> consumption of water. The third is your inability to discuss
> something without emotional displays.
>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Have Run
>> >> > Bob
>> >> >
>> >

>