 |
|
| General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Urring" > wrote in message
ink.net... > Mama2EandJ wrote: > > > > > >>From: Dave Urring > >>Date: 9/19/2004 9:50 PM Mountain Standard Time > >>Message-id: > > >> > >>Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and > >>post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've > >>been able to see. > >> > >>None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this > >>eating sure takes a lot of them in. > >> > >>Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall > >>we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times > >>a year they go to the doctor. > >> > >>I'll kick things off: > >> > >>Height: 5'10 > >> > >>Weight: 163 > >> > >>Age: 54yrs > >> > >>Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian > >> > >>Doctor-Trips/Year: None > >> > >>-------------------------------- > >> > >>Your turn: > >> > >>Height: > >> > >>Weight: > >> > >>Age: > >> > >>Diet-Style > >> > >>Doctor-Trips/Year > >> > >> > > > > > I cannot possibly imagine what business any of this is of > > yours. > > Copout. > > > Anyone who makes no doctor trips at least once a year is > >asking for trouble. Had your colonoscopy, got your cholesterol > >checked, had your BP checked???? > > > > I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century since I > adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially conscientious > diet: pure vegetarian. > > The human body does not naturally digest animal products and > has trouble with excessive proteins. > > One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. > > Milk is obviously for babies, for example. > > You need to worry about your health because you eat what you > have been programmed to eat. > > The health and fitness rate among pure vegetarians exceeds that > of animal product consumers by a _wide_ margin. > > The human body is naturally healthy. If it wasn't, there wouldn't > *be* a human race. 'Modern Medicine' has only been around for > a blink, in historical terms, and I don't know if you ever botherto open your eyes and look at the world instead of the TV, but > people are *not* healthy or fit, as a rule. So much for 'Modern > Medicine' eh? > > Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? > > It is foolish to give all that good food to some animal to > process before consuming the fraction of it that remains as a > monotonous mass of muscle. > > It sounds like you are seriously committed to vegetarianism. It also sounds like you want to convert others to this way of eating. Guess what? Bleating a bunch of ignorant, snotty, and "holier than thou" bullshit on a newsgroup is *not* the way to do it. If you really haven't been to a physician in 25 years then you are stupider than dirt. Why do you think that announcing your stuidity on a newsgroup will do anything other than make people scorn and pity you? If you are any evidence, a vegetarian diet leads to mental decay. Congratulations - you have been very effective in setting back your cause, much more effective than any meat eater could have been. -- Peter Aitken Remove the crap from my email address before using. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
>Mama2EandJ wrote:
>> >> >>>From: Dave Urring >>>Date: 9/19/2004 9:50 PM Mountain Standard Time >>>Message-id: > >>> >>>Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and >>>post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've >>>been able to see. >>> >>>None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this >>>eating sure takes a lot of them in. >>> >>>Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall >>>we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times >>>a year they go to the doctor. >>> >>>I'll kick things off: >>> >>>Height: 5'10 >>> >>>Weight: 163 >>> >>>Age: 54yrs >>> >>>Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian >>> >>>Doctor-Trips/Year: None >>> >>>-------------------------------- >>> >>>Your turn: >>> >>>Height: >>> >>>Weight: >>> >>>Age: >>> >>>Diet-Style >>> >>>Doctor-Trips/Year >>> >>> >> > >> I cannot possibly imagine what business any of this is of >> yours. > >Copout. > >> Anyone who makes no doctor trips at least once a year is >>asking for trouble. Had your colonoscopy, got your cholesterol >>checked, had your BP checked???? >> > >I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century since I >adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially conscientious >diet: pure vegetarian. > >The human body does not naturally digest animal products and >has trouble with excessive proteins. > >One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. > >Milk is obviously for babies, for example. > >You need to worry about your health because you eat what you >have been programmed to eat. > >The health and fitness rate among pure vegetarians exceeds that >of animal product consumers by a _wide_ margin. > >The human body is naturally healthy. If it wasn't, there wouldn't >*be* a human race. 'Modern Medicine' has only been around for >a blink, in historical terms, and I don't know if you ever botherto open your >eyes and look at the world instead of the TV, but >people are *not* healthy or fit, as a rule. So much for 'Modern >Medicine' eh? > >Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? > >It is foolish to give all that good food to some animal to >process before consuming the fraction of it that remains as a >monotonous mass of muscle. > > > > > > > > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
>Mama2EandJ wrote:
>> >> >>>From: Dave Urring >>>Date: 9/19/2004 9:50 PM Mountain Standard Time >>>Message-id: > >>> >>>Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and >>>post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've >>>been able to see. >>> >>>None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this >>>eating sure takes a lot of them in. >>> >>>Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall >>>we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times >>>a year they go to the doctor. >>> >>>I'll kick things off: >>> >>>Height: 5'10 >>> >>>Weight: 163 >>> >>>Age: 54yrs >>> >>>Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian >>> >>>Doctor-Trips/Year: None >>> >>>-------------------------------- >>> >>>Your turn: >>> >>>Height: >>> >>>Weight: >>> >>>Age: >>> >>>Diet-Style >>> >>>Doctor-Trips/Year >>> >>> >> > >> I cannot possibly imagine what business any of this is of >> yours. > >Copout. > >> Anyone who makes no doctor trips at least once a year is >>asking for trouble. Had your colonoscopy, got your cholesterol >>checked, had your BP checked???? >> > >I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century since I >adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially conscientious >diet: pure vegetarian. > >The human body does not naturally digest animal products and >has trouble with excessive proteins. > >One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. > >Milk is obviously for babies, for example. > >You need to worry about your health because you eat what you >have been programmed to eat. > >The health and fitness rate among pure vegetarians exceeds that >of animal product consumers by a _wide_ margin. > >The human body is naturally healthy. If it wasn't, there wouldn't >*be* a human race. 'Modern Medicine' has only been around for >a blink, in historical terms, and I don't know if you ever botherto open your >eyes and look at the world instead of the TV, but >people are *not* healthy or fit, as a rule. So much for 'Modern >Medicine' eh? > >Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? > >It is foolish to give all that good food to some animal to >process before consuming the fraction of it that remains as a >monotonous mass of muscle. > > > > > > > > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
>Mama2EandJ wrote:
>> >> >>>From: Dave Urring >>>Date: 9/19/2004 9:50 PM Mountain Standard Time >>>Message-id: > >>> >>>Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and >>>post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've >>>been able to see. >>> >>>None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this >>>eating sure takes a lot of them in. >>> >>>Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall >>>we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times >>>a year they go to the doctor. >>> >>>I'll kick things off: >>> >>>Height: 5'10 >>> >>>Weight: 163 >>> >>>Age: 54yrs >>> >>>Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian >>> >>>Doctor-Trips/Year: None >>> >>>-------------------------------- >>> >>>Your turn: >>> >>>Height: >>> >>>Weight: >>> >>>Age: >>> >>>Diet-Style >>> >>>Doctor-Trips/Year >>> >>> >> > >> I cannot possibly imagine what business any of this is of >> yours. > >Copout. > >> Anyone who makes no doctor trips at least once a year is >>asking for trouble. Had your colonoscopy, got your cholesterol >>checked, had your BP checked???? >> > >I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century since I >adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially conscientious >diet: pure vegetarian. > >The human body does not naturally digest animal products and >has trouble with excessive proteins. > >One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. > >Milk is obviously for babies, for example. > >You need to worry about your health because you eat what you >have been programmed to eat. > >The health and fitness rate among pure vegetarians exceeds that >of animal product consumers by a _wide_ margin. > >The human body is naturally healthy. If it wasn't, there wouldn't >*be* a human race. 'Modern Medicine' has only been around for >a blink, in historical terms, and I don't know if you ever botherto open your >eyes and look at the world instead of the TV, but >people are *not* healthy or fit, as a rule. So much for 'Modern >Medicine' eh? > >Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? > >It is foolish to give all that good food to some animal to >process before consuming the fraction of it that remains as a >monotonous mass of muscle. > You are an idiot. PLONK |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
>Mama2EandJ wrote:
>> >> >>>From: Dave Urring >>>Date: 9/19/2004 9:50 PM Mountain Standard Time >>>Message-id: > >>> >>>Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and >>>post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've >>>been able to see. >>> >>>None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this >>>eating sure takes a lot of them in. >>> >>>Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall >>>we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times >>>a year they go to the doctor. >>> >>>I'll kick things off: >>> >>>Height: 5'10 >>> >>>Weight: 163 >>> >>>Age: 54yrs >>> >>>Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian >>> >>>Doctor-Trips/Year: None >>> >>>-------------------------------- >>> >>>Your turn: >>> >>>Height: >>> >>>Weight: >>> >>>Age: >>> >>>Diet-Style >>> >>>Doctor-Trips/Year >>> >>> >> > >> I cannot possibly imagine what business any of this is of >> yours. > >Copout. > >> Anyone who makes no doctor trips at least once a year is >>asking for trouble. Had your colonoscopy, got your cholesterol >>checked, had your BP checked???? >> > >I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century since I >adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially conscientious >diet: pure vegetarian. > >The human body does not naturally digest animal products and >has trouble with excessive proteins. > >One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. > >Milk is obviously for babies, for example. > >You need to worry about your health because you eat what you >have been programmed to eat. > >The health and fitness rate among pure vegetarians exceeds that >of animal product consumers by a _wide_ margin. > >The human body is naturally healthy. If it wasn't, there wouldn't >*be* a human race. 'Modern Medicine' has only been around for >a blink, in historical terms, and I don't know if you ever botherto open your >eyes and look at the world instead of the TV, but >people are *not* healthy or fit, as a rule. So much for 'Modern >Medicine' eh? > >Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? > >It is foolish to give all that good food to some animal to >process before consuming the fraction of it that remains as a >monotonous mass of muscle. > You are an idiot. PLONK |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
PENMART01 wrote:
>>Dave Smith >> >>Dave Erring wrote: >> >> >>>It isn't the cause of all illness. But consuming a lot of flesh >>>from animals that have been mistreated and pumped full of >>>chemicals and eat their dead brothers is not a real bright idea. >>> >>>Especially if you are sitting around on your fat butt all day. >>> >>>We should add fitness level too. >>> >>>Since you don't want to answer, I'll assume the following: >>> >>>40 years of age. >>> >>>5'10 >>> >>>250# >>> >>>You eat a a lot of animal products. >>> >>>At least a dozen trips to the doctor a year. >>> >>>Fitness level: 1 out of 10 >> >>My father in law would fail your test. He used to get up in the morning and >>have two spoons full of yogurt, some cereal with fruit, 2 poached eggs with >>cheese and salt along with 2-3 slices of toast, each smeared with butter and >>honey. He went to restaurants for lunch and usually had red meat with gravy. >>He was a big meat eater. Whenever he served a roast he would have seconds, >>thirds, maybe a fourth helping. After his wife died his evening meal was >>reduced to peanut butter on crackers or cold cuts, and always a double >>martini. >> >>The last time I saw him stand on his head and chug a beer he was 86. That >>was about the same time I saw him run a half a city block to catch a >>streetcar. He rarely went to the doctor. He could still fit into his WW I >>army uniform, and he was quite fit and active until he died peacefully in his >>sleep a few weeks before his 95th birthday. >> >>My wife inherited her father's eating habits. She eats bacon and eggs for >>breakfast, or just hard boiled eggs and cheese if she is in a hurry. She goes >>through 1-2 dozen eggs per week, at least a pound of cheese, uses cream in >>her coffee (no substitutes). She uses a lot of butter on vegetables. She >>eats 2-3 times as much meat as I do, and especially likes red meats. While I >>cut off the fat from my meat, she not only eats all the fat on her meat but >>often eats the stuff that I cut off. She has no cholesterol problems. She >>avoids starch in all forms, and eats very little sugar. At age 59 she is >>5'7" and weighs 135, and people are always commenting on how great she looks. >> >>My grandmother almost always had bacon and eggs for breakfast. She had cream >>in her tea and smeared bread with butter. She had meat with every meal. She >>was never much overweight and died 2 weeks short of her 100th birthday after >>breaking a hip. She had survived a broken hip two years earlier. >> >> >>According to your misguided estimates, they would all have been 250 and >>frequent visitors to the doctor and died young. > > > Yup... can't rely on trends... my grandfather, (my father's father) never > retired, worked right up to his dying day at age 97. And no sedentary job, he > retired from the restaurant business to become a plumber, didn't drive, so > walked to each job, carrying all his tools/supplies on his back in huge burlap > sacks... I remember even in his eighties he'd sling a cast iron bath tub onto > his back, held with a rope around his waist, and carried it up three flights of > stairs. He must've weighed 220lbs, was about 6' 2", and ate like ten horses, > every meal was a banquet... calories was not a word in his vocabulary. After > work he'd sit on the front porch in his rocking chair watching the world pass > by (the man never seemed to have a care in the world, no worrier he), rocked in > his chair spooning down a tall class of good cavier washed down by a liter of > vodka, this every day fare while waiting to be called for dinner... oh, he > chain smoked Chesterfields. The little old ladies half his age passed by > muttering that man will drink himself to death, and so he did, at 97. > > My mother's father was a roofer, but no ordinary roofer, he was a tall building > coppersmith, did the roof on the Chrysler building. His knees went in his late > sixties so he could no longer climb, but he lived until 86. His favorite daily > snack consisted mainly of tins of oil packed sardines with raw onions eaten > with entire huge loaves of Russian black bread slathered with butter, and tall > tea glasses filled to the brim with slivervitz or Old Overhall whiskey... this > before dinner. > > I think their secret to long life was hard physical work and never stuffing > their emotions. So I decided to retire to a farm, and I always did tell it > like it is. > > > > > ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- > ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- > ********* > "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." > Sheldon > ```````````` The ETOH probably helped as well, along with the fact that they did not take trivial things so seriously. Also, the exercise helps. Moderate drinkers usually have some stigmata of chronic liver damage (after years of moderate to heavy drinking,) but their arteries are usually squeaky clean. They (unless they drink and don't eat,) usually live long lives (unless they are drinkers that practice unsafe habits (swimming or driving while drunk.) Rich -- "Dum Spiro, Spero." As long as I breath, I hope. Cicero |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring wrote:
> I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century since I > adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially conscientious > diet: pure vegetarian. When you say you haven't been to a doctor, is that because you've experienced no symptoms that could be helped by a doctor or because you just haven't gone to a doctor while ignoring symptoms? If you're 54 years old now and haven't seen a doctor for 25 years, are you saying you needed a doctor for the first 29 years of your life? What for? Were you eating meat then? I'll spell out the obvious. Based on broad epidemiological research, a meat based diet helps prevent some health troubles while causing others. It is hard to get enough calories with no animal products but hard to get enough essential fiber, vitamins and minerals with no plant based foods. That's just for starts. There's tons more along those lines. > The human body does not naturally digest animal products and > has trouble with excessive proteins. I've heard that over and over, but it has never made any sense to me. I had duck for dinner last night (in a pepper and orange broth and a side of stir fried onion, red pepper and home-grown cabbage in a sauce made of mustard, tamari, cider vinegar, fresh ginger and thickened with corn starch). After eating the duck, I felt full. I'm sure I digested it meaning that my body was able to break down and use the fats and proteins contained in the duck. If I didn't do that naturally, how the hell did I do it? > One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. I've heard this a lot too. I can understand someone losing a taste or desire for a particular food. I know that forcing oneself to eat a food one doesn't care for can make one sick, but lose the ability to digest meat after a year? I've just never seen it. What happens to the ingested but not digested meat? It passes through the digestive tract with the nutrients in place? With non of the fats and proteins used by the body? It makes sense to say that I can't digest mulberry leaves or palm fronds. If I chew them and swallow them, I can't get nutrition from them, but meat? And if one loses the ability to digest them in a year, how did one ever have the ability to digest them? What's this non-natural way that people have of digesting meat before they lose it? > Milk is obviously for babies, for example. Here's another one that I've heard over and over and have to wonder about. Babies do obviously get most of their nutrition from milk, but that doesn't mean that adults can't. Some adults are lactose intolerant, and some adults are allergic to milk proteins, but lots of other adults aren't. (The same can be said for some adults being allergic to ragweed pollen while others aren't.) There are whole cultures that get most of their calories and nutrition from milk and cheese products. Until the last 50 years or so, the Masai peoples of Kenya lived on milk and meat. Theirs wasn't a natural diet? They lived that way for centuries. > The human body is naturally healthy. If it wasn't, there wouldn't > *be* a human race. 'Modern Medicine' has only been around for > a blink, in historical terms, and I don't know if you ever botherto open your eyes and look at the world instead of the TV, but > people are *not* healthy or fit, as a rule. So much for 'Modern > Medicine' eh? Take a look at infant mortality rates and life expectancies in populations before modern medicine. I'm sure it will be an eye-opener. Look at those statistics in parts of the world where there's limited access to modern medicine today. Notice that in those parts of the world, people can't afford meat. As for health being a necessity for a human race, you don't understand evolution. All that's necessary for a human race is surviving human offspring. > Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? I realize we'll never change each others' minds, but I hope you'll ask yourself some of the above questions anyway. Or answer them for me here. I'm genuninely curious where these ideas came from. I'd love to know what "natural" and "rational" mean in this context. (And since I'm asking you to answer my questions, I'll answer yours: 46 years old, 5'4", 135 pounds, varied diet including whole grains, processed flours, vegetables, fruits, fruit juices, nuts, spices, baked goodies as in cookies and cakes, wine, some meat, poulty, fish, shellfish, also a little junk in the form of chocolate, potato chips, ice cream, and the rare soda. I feel healthy, healthier when I exercise but I'm bad about that, and have been to the doctor this year for my first annual check-up in 4 years. She yelled at me and ordered me to get a mammogram.) --Lia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring wrote:
> I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century since I > adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially conscientious > diet: pure vegetarian. When you say you haven't been to a doctor, is that because you've experienced no symptoms that could be helped by a doctor or because you just haven't gone to a doctor while ignoring symptoms? If you're 54 years old now and haven't seen a doctor for 25 years, are you saying you needed a doctor for the first 29 years of your life? What for? Were you eating meat then? I'll spell out the obvious. Based on broad epidemiological research, a meat based diet helps prevent some health troubles while causing others. It is hard to get enough calories with no animal products but hard to get enough essential fiber, vitamins and minerals with no plant based foods. That's just for starts. There's tons more along those lines. > The human body does not naturally digest animal products and > has trouble with excessive proteins. I've heard that over and over, but it has never made any sense to me. I had duck for dinner last night (in a pepper and orange broth and a side of stir fried onion, red pepper and home-grown cabbage in a sauce made of mustard, tamari, cider vinegar, fresh ginger and thickened with corn starch). After eating the duck, I felt full. I'm sure I digested it meaning that my body was able to break down and use the fats and proteins contained in the duck. If I didn't do that naturally, how the hell did I do it? > One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. I've heard this a lot too. I can understand someone losing a taste or desire for a particular food. I know that forcing oneself to eat a food one doesn't care for can make one sick, but lose the ability to digest meat after a year? I've just never seen it. What happens to the ingested but not digested meat? It passes through the digestive tract with the nutrients in place? With non of the fats and proteins used by the body? It makes sense to say that I can't digest mulberry leaves or palm fronds. If I chew them and swallow them, I can't get nutrition from them, but meat? And if one loses the ability to digest them in a year, how did one ever have the ability to digest them? What's this non-natural way that people have of digesting meat before they lose it? > Milk is obviously for babies, for example. Here's another one that I've heard over and over and have to wonder about. Babies do obviously get most of their nutrition from milk, but that doesn't mean that adults can't. Some adults are lactose intolerant, and some adults are allergic to milk proteins, but lots of other adults aren't. (The same can be said for some adults being allergic to ragweed pollen while others aren't.) There are whole cultures that get most of their calories and nutrition from milk and cheese products. Until the last 50 years or so, the Masai peoples of Kenya lived on milk and meat. Theirs wasn't a natural diet? They lived that way for centuries. > The human body is naturally healthy. If it wasn't, there wouldn't > *be* a human race. 'Modern Medicine' has only been around for > a blink, in historical terms, and I don't know if you ever botherto open your eyes and look at the world instead of the TV, but > people are *not* healthy or fit, as a rule. So much for 'Modern > Medicine' eh? Take a look at infant mortality rates and life expectancies in populations before modern medicine. I'm sure it will be an eye-opener. Look at those statistics in parts of the world where there's limited access to modern medicine today. Notice that in those parts of the world, people can't afford meat. As for health being a necessity for a human race, you don't understand evolution. All that's necessary for a human race is surviving human offspring. > Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? I realize we'll never change each others' minds, but I hope you'll ask yourself some of the above questions anyway. Or answer them for me here. I'm genuninely curious where these ideas came from. I'd love to know what "natural" and "rational" mean in this context. (And since I'm asking you to answer my questions, I'll answer yours: 46 years old, 5'4", 135 pounds, varied diet including whole grains, processed flours, vegetables, fruits, fruit juices, nuts, spices, baked goodies as in cookies and cakes, wine, some meat, poulty, fish, shellfish, also a little junk in the form of chocolate, potato chips, ice cream, and the rare soda. I feel healthy, healthier when I exercise but I'm bad about that, and have been to the doctor this year for my first annual check-up in 4 years. She yelled at me and ordered me to get a mammogram.) --Lia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring wrote:
> I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century since I > adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially conscientious > diet: pure vegetarian. When you say you haven't been to a doctor, is that because you've experienced no symptoms that could be helped by a doctor or because you just haven't gone to a doctor while ignoring symptoms? If you're 54 years old now and haven't seen a doctor for 25 years, are you saying you needed a doctor for the first 29 years of your life? What for? Were you eating meat then? I'll spell out the obvious. Based on broad epidemiological research, a meat based diet helps prevent some health troubles while causing others. It is hard to get enough calories with no animal products but hard to get enough essential fiber, vitamins and minerals with no plant based foods. That's just for starts. There's tons more along those lines. > The human body does not naturally digest animal products and > has trouble with excessive proteins. I've heard that over and over, but it has never made any sense to me. I had duck for dinner last night (in a pepper and orange broth and a side of stir fried onion, red pepper and home-grown cabbage in a sauce made of mustard, tamari, cider vinegar, fresh ginger and thickened with corn starch). After eating the duck, I felt full. I'm sure I digested it meaning that my body was able to break down and use the fats and proteins contained in the duck. If I didn't do that naturally, how the hell did I do it? > One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. I've heard this a lot too. I can understand someone losing a taste or desire for a particular food. I know that forcing oneself to eat a food one doesn't care for can make one sick, but lose the ability to digest meat after a year? I've just never seen it. What happens to the ingested but not digested meat? It passes through the digestive tract with the nutrients in place? With non of the fats and proteins used by the body? It makes sense to say that I can't digest mulberry leaves or palm fronds. If I chew them and swallow them, I can't get nutrition from them, but meat? And if one loses the ability to digest them in a year, how did one ever have the ability to digest them? What's this non-natural way that people have of digesting meat before they lose it? > Milk is obviously for babies, for example. Here's another one that I've heard over and over and have to wonder about. Babies do obviously get most of their nutrition from milk, but that doesn't mean that adults can't. Some adults are lactose intolerant, and some adults are allergic to milk proteins, but lots of other adults aren't. (The same can be said for some adults being allergic to ragweed pollen while others aren't.) There are whole cultures that get most of their calories and nutrition from milk and cheese products. Until the last 50 years or so, the Masai peoples of Kenya lived on milk and meat. Theirs wasn't a natural diet? They lived that way for centuries. > The human body is naturally healthy. If it wasn't, there wouldn't > *be* a human race. 'Modern Medicine' has only been around for > a blink, in historical terms, and I don't know if you ever botherto open your eyes and look at the world instead of the TV, but > people are *not* healthy or fit, as a rule. So much for 'Modern > Medicine' eh? Take a look at infant mortality rates and life expectancies in populations before modern medicine. I'm sure it will be an eye-opener. Look at those statistics in parts of the world where there's limited access to modern medicine today. Notice that in those parts of the world, people can't afford meat. As for health being a necessity for a human race, you don't understand evolution. All that's necessary for a human race is surviving human offspring. > Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? I realize we'll never change each others' minds, but I hope you'll ask yourself some of the above questions anyway. Or answer them for me here. I'm genuninely curious where these ideas came from. I'd love to know what "natural" and "rational" mean in this context. (And since I'm asking you to answer my questions, I'll answer yours: 46 years old, 5'4", 135 pounds, varied diet including whole grains, processed flours, vegetables, fruits, fruit juices, nuts, spices, baked goodies as in cookies and cakes, wine, some meat, poulty, fish, shellfish, also a little junk in the form of chocolate, potato chips, ice cream, and the rare soda. I feel healthy, healthier when I exercise but I'm bad about that, and have been to the doctor this year for my first annual check-up in 4 years. She yelled at me and ordered me to get a mammogram.) --Lia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Peter wrote:
> It sounds like you are seriously committed to vegetarianism. It also > sounds like you want to convert others to this way of eating. Guess what? > Bleating a bunch of ignorant, snotty, and "holier than thou" bullshit on > a newsgroup is *not* the way to do it. If you really haven't been to a > physician in 25 years then you are stupider than dirt. Why do you think > that announcing your stuidity on a newsgroup will do anything other than > make people scorn and pity you? If you are any evidence, a vegetarian diet > leads to mental decay. Congratulations - you have been very effective in > setting back your cause, much more effective than any meat eater could > have been. *clap clap clap* Best one yet. Thanks, Peter. Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Peter wrote:
> It sounds like you are seriously committed to vegetarianism. It also > sounds like you want to convert others to this way of eating. Guess what? > Bleating a bunch of ignorant, snotty, and "holier than thou" bullshit on > a newsgroup is *not* the way to do it. If you really haven't been to a > physician in 25 years then you are stupider than dirt. Why do you think > that announcing your stuidity on a newsgroup will do anything other than > make people scorn and pity you? If you are any evidence, a vegetarian diet > leads to mental decay. Congratulations - you have been very effective in > setting back your cause, much more effective than any meat eater could > have been. *clap clap clap* Best one yet. Thanks, Peter. Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring > wrote:
>Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and >post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've >been able to see. > >None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this >eating sure takes a lot of them in. > >Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall >we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times >a year they go to the doctor. > >I'll kick things off: >Height: 5'10 >Weight: 163 >Age: 54yrs >Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian >Doctor-Trips/Year: None I'd answer, but it's way more complicated than that. I've changed my eating habits drastically at least twice in the past two years to accomplish different goals. I lost 40 lbs eating one good meal a day, now I'm turning 10-15 lbs of fat into muscle by eating 6 small meals and doing 500-1000 kcal of exercise every day. At least, I hope I am. --Blair "I could just be growing clothes." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring > wrote:
>Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and >post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've >been able to see. > >None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this >eating sure takes a lot of them in. > >Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall >we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times >a year they go to the doctor. > >I'll kick things off: >Height: 5'10 >Weight: 163 >Age: 54yrs >Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian >Doctor-Trips/Year: None I'd answer, but it's way more complicated than that. I've changed my eating habits drastically at least twice in the past two years to accomplish different goals. I lost 40 lbs eating one good meal a day, now I'm turning 10-15 lbs of fat into muscle by eating 6 small meals and doing 500-1000 kcal of exercise every day. At least, I hope I am. --Blair "I could just be growing clothes." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jessica V. > wrote:
>Is this the new center for science in the public interest teams up with >PETA study to determine that all foodies are overweight and that eating >meat is the cause of all illness? It's not eating meat. It's eating 2 lbs of meat a day when your RDAs call for 12 oz. --Blair "Pass the Ultimate Cheeseburgers." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jessica V. > wrote:
>Is this the new center for science in the public interest teams up with >PETA study to determine that all foodies are overweight and that eating >meat is the cause of all illness? It's not eating meat. It's eating 2 lbs of meat a day when your RDAs call for 12 oz. --Blair "Pass the Ultimate Cheeseburgers." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
great! but 500-1000Kcal? unbelieveable.
Kenny > I'd answer, but it's way more complicated than that. > I've changed my eating habits drastically at least twice in > the past two years to accomplish different goals. I lost > 40 lbs eating one good meal a day, now I'm turning 10-15 > lbs of fat into muscle by eating 6 small meals and doing > 500-1000 kcal of exercise every day. > > At least, I hope I am. > > --Blair > "I could just be growing clothes." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
great! but 500-1000Kcal? unbelieveable.
Kenny > I'd answer, but it's way more complicated than that. > I've changed my eating habits drastically at least twice in > the past two years to accomplish different goals. I lost > 40 lbs eating one good meal a day, now I'm turning 10-15 > lbs of fat into muscle by eating 6 small meals and doing > 500-1000 kcal of exercise every day. > > At least, I hope I am. > > --Blair > "I could just be growing clothes." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring wrote:
> Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and > post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've > been able to see. > > None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this > eating sure takes a lot of them in. > > Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall > we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times > a year they go to the doctor. > > I'll kick things off: > > Height: 5'10 > > Weight: 163 > > Age: 54yrs > > Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian > > Doctor-Trips/Year: None > > -------------------------------- > > Your turn: Height:6'1" Weight:190 Age:52 Diet-Style: Everything but eyes Doctor-Trips/Year: whenever the bleeding won't stop -- Sir Baldin Pramer, R.P.A. "Tell the Queen I will call her back as soon as I have finished my tea." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring wrote:
> Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and > post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've > been able to see. > > None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this > eating sure takes a lot of them in. > > Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall > we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times > a year they go to the doctor. > > I'll kick things off: > > Height: 5'10 > > Weight: 163 > > Age: 54yrs > > Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian > > Doctor-Trips/Year: None > > -------------------------------- > > Your turn: Height:6'1" Weight:190 Age:52 Diet-Style: Everything but eyes Doctor-Trips/Year: whenever the bleeding won't stop -- Sir Baldin Pramer, R.P.A. "Tell the Queen I will call her back as soon as I have finished my tea." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring wrote:
> wrote: > >> >>>Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall >>>we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times >>>a year they go to the doctor. >> >>That's a stupid idea. > > > We should add fitness level too. > > Since you don't want to answer, I'll assume the following: I will assume the following about you: IQ: 100 PIA level 89/100 -- Sir Baldin Pramer, R.P.A. "Tell the Queen I will call her back as soon as I have finished my tea." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring wrote:
> wrote: > >> >>>Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall >>>we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times >>>a year they go to the doctor. >> >>That's a stupid idea. > > > We should add fitness level too. > > Since you don't want to answer, I'll assume the following: I will assume the following about you: IQ: 100 PIA level 89/100 -- Sir Baldin Pramer, R.P.A. "Tell the Queen I will call her back as soon as I have finished my tea." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Margaret Suran wrote:
> Finally a question I am willing to answer: Yes, I like puppies. And > Dogs. Kittens and cats, too. Very much. Each with its proper sauce and presentation. -- Sir Baldin Pramer, R.P.A. "Tell the Queen I will call her back as soon as I have finished my tea." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Margaret Suran wrote:
> Finally a question I am willing to answer: Yes, I like puppies. And > Dogs. Kittens and cats, too. Very much. Each with its proper sauce and presentation. -- Sir Baldin Pramer, R.P.A. "Tell the Queen I will call her back as soon as I have finished my tea." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Margaret Suran wrote:
> Finally a question I am willing to answer: Yes, I like puppies. And > Dogs. Kittens and cats, too. Very much. Each with its proper sauce and presentation. -- Sir Baldin Pramer, R.P.A. "Tell the Queen I will call her back as soon as I have finished my tea." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
> Copout.
Is that the limit of your argument ? Can your obviously undernourished brain form complete, well thought out sentences ? > > I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century since I > adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially conscientious > diet: pure vegetarian. Perhaps you are just ignorant or in denial of your problems. > The human body does not naturally digest animal products and > has trouble with excessive proteins. This is patently false. The human body does naturally digest animal products. Perhaps you believe in some supernatural force that does it for us ? Or do you think all the animal products are still undigested in our stomachs ? > One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. If you really want people to believe this, then provide some tiny little tidbit of information that counters in any way the overwhelming preponderence of evidence to the contrary. > > Milk is obviously for babies, for example. > > You need to worry about your health because you eat what you > have been programmed to eat. Indeed one must. The human body requires vitamin B12, and there is no natural vegetarian source of this vitamin. Only by artificial cutivation of yeasts and other such microbial life forms can a vegetarian get enough of this vital nutrient. This is far more unnatural than meat eating. > > The health and fitness rate among pure vegetarians exceeds that > of animal product consumers by a _wide_ margin. > Perhaps by some standards it does, but you seem to have little evidence of this, and believe that simply repeating your argument ad nauseum will gain converts to you unnatural life style. Humans are by nature omnivores. Such a diet is healthy and proper for humans. But perhaps you thought our prehistoric ancestors lived on decaf soy lattes and vegemite ? > The human body is naturally healthy. If it wasn't, there wouldn't > *be* a human race. 'Modern Medicine' has only been around for > a blink, in historical terms, and I don't know if you ever botherto open your eyes and look at the world instead of the TV, but > people are *not* healthy or fit, as a rule. So much for 'Modern > Medicine' eh? Ah, now I understand. You are not only deluded with respect to the human diet, but you are also a Luddite. Modern medicine has greatly increased the human life span and quality. Before the modern era, people's lives were short and brutal. Do you brush your teeth or use dental floss ? Have you ever used bandages, anti-septics, or other modern medical technology ? Perhaps you can skip you next tetanus shot and never disinfect your wounds and demonstate your beliefs. All this talk with no evidence seems rather childish. > Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? Indeed, have a tuna steak, some peppers, onions, tomatoes, and garlic. A lime-butter sauce would go great with the tuna. Cook up some black beans with a piece of salt-pork and orange juice for the side. For exercise I'll go hunting. I love the ourdoors. I find it hilarious that all the vegan types I meet are urban dwellers. People who actually live out in the country think vegan types are crazy. Why don't these vegetarians actually practice what they preach ? Is it that only the modern industrial city environment makes that unnatural life style possible ? Soy milk doesn't grow on trees. Tempeh was only possible after modern civilization began. Grains are a food stuff of the near past when one talks about the history of the human race. The high grain, high fruit diets are problematic health wise. A piece of meat doesn't spike your blood sugar level the way grains and fruit do. Perhaps you should go to the doctor and get checked for diabetes, and anemia while you are at it. I have considered the vegetarian position, and discarded most of the ideas. I would rather live like Julia Child than the anemic vegan types I have met. The vegans seem to do nothing all day except complain about other people, while people like Julia live long and happy lives. The vegans are always angry at the world, and seem to delight in the perverted tactics of PETA, while Julia Child was at peace with those around her. The Earth Liberation Front is an affront to humanity. They are violent and anti-social. Perhaps the deficiencies of their unnatural life style, or the perversion caused by self-denial of their needs has led to this abominable situation. Like all radical philosophies, veganism seems to attract the worst of humanity, and I will not be a part of their hate filled idealism. Good bye troll, Dean G. Defined in psychological terms, a fanatic is a man who consciously over-compensates a secret doubt. -- Aldous Huxley, someone who eventually got a clue |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
> Copout.
Is that the limit of your argument ? Can your obviously undernourished brain form complete, well thought out sentences ? > > I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century since I > adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially conscientious > diet: pure vegetarian. Perhaps you are just ignorant or in denial of your problems. > The human body does not naturally digest animal products and > has trouble with excessive proteins. This is patently false. The human body does naturally digest animal products. Perhaps you believe in some supernatural force that does it for us ? Or do you think all the animal products are still undigested in our stomachs ? > One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. If you really want people to believe this, then provide some tiny little tidbit of information that counters in any way the overwhelming preponderence of evidence to the contrary. > > Milk is obviously for babies, for example. > > You need to worry about your health because you eat what you > have been programmed to eat. Indeed one must. The human body requires vitamin B12, and there is no natural vegetarian source of this vitamin. Only by artificial cutivation of yeasts and other such microbial life forms can a vegetarian get enough of this vital nutrient. This is far more unnatural than meat eating. > > The health and fitness rate among pure vegetarians exceeds that > of animal product consumers by a _wide_ margin. > Perhaps by some standards it does, but you seem to have little evidence of this, and believe that simply repeating your argument ad nauseum will gain converts to you unnatural life style. Humans are by nature omnivores. Such a diet is healthy and proper for humans. But perhaps you thought our prehistoric ancestors lived on decaf soy lattes and vegemite ? > The human body is naturally healthy. If it wasn't, there wouldn't > *be* a human race. 'Modern Medicine' has only been around for > a blink, in historical terms, and I don't know if you ever botherto open your eyes and look at the world instead of the TV, but > people are *not* healthy or fit, as a rule. So much for 'Modern > Medicine' eh? Ah, now I understand. You are not only deluded with respect to the human diet, but you are also a Luddite. Modern medicine has greatly increased the human life span and quality. Before the modern era, people's lives were short and brutal. Do you brush your teeth or use dental floss ? Have you ever used bandages, anti-septics, or other modern medical technology ? Perhaps you can skip you next tetanus shot and never disinfect your wounds and demonstate your beliefs. All this talk with no evidence seems rather childish. > Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? Indeed, have a tuna steak, some peppers, onions, tomatoes, and garlic. A lime-butter sauce would go great with the tuna. Cook up some black beans with a piece of salt-pork and orange juice for the side. For exercise I'll go hunting. I love the ourdoors. I find it hilarious that all the vegan types I meet are urban dwellers. People who actually live out in the country think vegan types are crazy. Why don't these vegetarians actually practice what they preach ? Is it that only the modern industrial city environment makes that unnatural life style possible ? Soy milk doesn't grow on trees. Tempeh was only possible after modern civilization began. Grains are a food stuff of the near past when one talks about the history of the human race. The high grain, high fruit diets are problematic health wise. A piece of meat doesn't spike your blood sugar level the way grains and fruit do. Perhaps you should go to the doctor and get checked for diabetes, and anemia while you are at it. I have considered the vegetarian position, and discarded most of the ideas. I would rather live like Julia Child than the anemic vegan types I have met. The vegans seem to do nothing all day except complain about other people, while people like Julia live long and happy lives. The vegans are always angry at the world, and seem to delight in the perverted tactics of PETA, while Julia Child was at peace with those around her. The Earth Liberation Front is an affront to humanity. They are violent and anti-social. Perhaps the deficiencies of their unnatural life style, or the perversion caused by self-denial of their needs has led to this abominable situation. Like all radical philosophies, veganism seems to attract the worst of humanity, and I will not be a part of their hate filled idealism. Good bye troll, Dean G. Defined in psychological terms, a fanatic is a man who consciously over-compensates a secret doubt. -- Aldous Huxley, someone who eventually got a clue |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dan Abel wrote:
> Little babies get *all* of their nutrition from milk. They cannot eat > solid food. The only reason I included the caveat that babies get almost all their nutrition from milk is that I figured someone would point out that some babies do fine on formula made from soy and other non-milk ingredients in it. (If usenet does anything, it teaches one to write precisely the first time.) We're in agreement about the milk. I wonder about the meat though. I'm not speaking from any scientific standpoint, only from talking to friends. I think we're in agreement here too on the difference between "not being able to digest" and "indigestion." I believe someone who has been vegetarian for many years would be able to handle a small amount of meat but would get sick from too much. But meat eaters often get indigestion when they eat a lot of meat too. I believe the vegetarians would get indigestion from a lot of rich vegetarian food. In other words, I think the trouble is too much rich food at once no matter what one's previous diet. --Lia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dan Abel wrote:
> Little babies get *all* of their nutrition from milk. They cannot eat > solid food. The only reason I included the caveat that babies get almost all their nutrition from milk is that I figured someone would point out that some babies do fine on formula made from soy and other non-milk ingredients in it. (If usenet does anything, it teaches one to write precisely the first time.) We're in agreement about the milk. I wonder about the meat though. I'm not speaking from any scientific standpoint, only from talking to friends. I think we're in agreement here too on the difference between "not being able to digest" and "indigestion." I believe someone who has been vegetarian for many years would be able to handle a small amount of meat but would get sick from too much. But meat eaters often get indigestion when they eat a lot of meat too. I believe the vegetarians would get indigestion from a lot of rich vegetarian food. In other words, I think the trouble is too much rich food at once no matter what one's previous diet. --Lia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Julia Altshuler wrote:
> Dave Urring wrote: > > > The human body does not naturally digest animal products and That is completely false. If it were true, explain those Eskimos and Inuits who still live the traditional hunting lifestyle who can go months or years eating only raw seal meat and fish. If it were true, explain that most of humanity includes meat in their diet. > > has trouble with excessive proteins. Define excessive. As a vegitarian you will likely claim that it is less than I current eat, yet I have excellent digestion. I have on occasion eaten twice as much as my average protein and digested it just fine, an occasional prime rib dinner. > I've heard that over and over, but it has never made any sense to me. It doesn't make sense because it is false. > > One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. > > I've heard this a lot too. I can understand someone losing a taste or > desire for a particular food. I know that forcing oneself to eat a food > one doesn't care for can make one sick, but lose the ability to digest > meat after a year? I've just never seen it. The loss happens but it is *not* permanent. The body produces various digestive enzymes, and it uses your food in the last few months to determine the ratios it produces. Avoid meat for several months in a row and it will take several days before it adjusts the enzyme ratios to handle it. So, if you skip meat for a while, suddenly eating meat again will trigger temporary indigestion. That happens the other way around, too. I've been on Atkins for 5 years. High-fat, medium-protein, low-carb. Once I had a delicious vegitarian dinner at an Indian place. High-starch, medium-protein, low-fat. I gave me my first bout of indigestion in several years. I am certain I could adjust to eating that food in a few weeks, but it gave me indigestion that *once*. If someone never learns that our bodies adjust back and forth, they can easily come to the false conclusion that one adjustment may be permanent. > What happens to the > ingested but not digested meat? It passes through the digestive tract > with the nutrients in place? With non of the fats and proteins used by > the body? Not *none*, just most. The body always makes some of every needed digestive enzyme so even with indistion from making the wrong ratio, some is still digested. But generally, if a vegitarian eats one meat-heavy meal, most of it will pass out the other end. > And if one loses the ability to digest them in a > year, how did one ever have the ability to digest them? The loss is only temporary, and the loss happens the same way in the other direction for people who eat meat/non-starchy-veggie based diets and then suddenly have a meat-free/very-starchy meal. > > Milk is obviously for babies, for example. > > Here's another one that I've heard over and over and have to wonder > about. Babies do obviously get most of their nutrition from milk, but > that doesn't mean that adults can't. Some adults are lactose > intolerant, and some adults are allergic to milk proteins, but lots of > other adults aren't. Also many are mildly intolerant of milk proteins without knowing it. Most folks should try, at some point in their lives, going a few weeks dairy-free and then eating dairy again. if you feel better without dairy and/or feel worse when you add it back, consider going dairy-free from then on. If you've eaten dairy at least every other day your entire life, your normal may include symptoms that you don't recognize because they are always tehre. (I tried this with dairy and found no ill effect. Then I tried it with wheat and the difference was dramatic improvement). > > Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? > > I'd love to > know what "natural" and "rational" mean in this context. It means different things for different people. Someone who pushes their own agenda on *everyone* misses that point. A vegitarian diet may well be natural for some percentage of the human population, but it isn't natural for everyone. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Julia Altshuler wrote:
> Dave Urring wrote: > > > The human body does not naturally digest animal products and That is completely false. If it were true, explain those Eskimos and Inuits who still live the traditional hunting lifestyle who can go months or years eating only raw seal meat and fish. If it were true, explain that most of humanity includes meat in their diet. > > has trouble with excessive proteins. Define excessive. As a vegitarian you will likely claim that it is less than I current eat, yet I have excellent digestion. I have on occasion eaten twice as much as my average protein and digested it just fine, an occasional prime rib dinner. > I've heard that over and over, but it has never made any sense to me. It doesn't make sense because it is false. > > One loses the ability to digest them in six months to a year. > > I've heard this a lot too. I can understand someone losing a taste or > desire for a particular food. I know that forcing oneself to eat a food > one doesn't care for can make one sick, but lose the ability to digest > meat after a year? I've just never seen it. The loss happens but it is *not* permanent. The body produces various digestive enzymes, and it uses your food in the last few months to determine the ratios it produces. Avoid meat for several months in a row and it will take several days before it adjusts the enzyme ratios to handle it. So, if you skip meat for a while, suddenly eating meat again will trigger temporary indigestion. That happens the other way around, too. I've been on Atkins for 5 years. High-fat, medium-protein, low-carb. Once I had a delicious vegitarian dinner at an Indian place. High-starch, medium-protein, low-fat. I gave me my first bout of indigestion in several years. I am certain I could adjust to eating that food in a few weeks, but it gave me indigestion that *once*. If someone never learns that our bodies adjust back and forth, they can easily come to the false conclusion that one adjustment may be permanent. > What happens to the > ingested but not digested meat? It passes through the digestive tract > with the nutrients in place? With non of the fats and proteins used by > the body? Not *none*, just most. The body always makes some of every needed digestive enzyme so even with indistion from making the wrong ratio, some is still digested. But generally, if a vegitarian eats one meat-heavy meal, most of it will pass out the other end. > And if one loses the ability to digest them in a > year, how did one ever have the ability to digest them? The loss is only temporary, and the loss happens the same way in the other direction for people who eat meat/non-starchy-veggie based diets and then suddenly have a meat-free/very-starchy meal. > > Milk is obviously for babies, for example. > > Here's another one that I've heard over and over and have to wonder > about. Babies do obviously get most of their nutrition from milk, but > that doesn't mean that adults can't. Some adults are lactose > intolerant, and some adults are allergic to milk proteins, but lots of > other adults aren't. Also many are mildly intolerant of milk proteins without knowing it. Most folks should try, at some point in their lives, going a few weeks dairy-free and then eating dairy again. if you feel better without dairy and/or feel worse when you add it back, consider going dairy-free from then on. If you've eaten dairy at least every other day your entire life, your normal may include symptoms that you don't recognize because they are always tehre. (I tried this with dairy and found no ill effect. Then I tried it with wheat and the difference was dramatic improvement). > > Why not just eat rationally and get some exercise? > > I'd love to > know what "natural" and "rational" mean in this context. It means different things for different people. Someone who pushes their own agenda on *everyone* misses that point. A vegitarian diet may well be natural for some percentage of the human population, but it isn't natural for everyone. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Dave Urring" > wrote in message .net... > Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and > post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've > been able to see. > > None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this > eating sure takes a lot of them in. > > Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall > we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times > a year they go to the doctor. Just a few thing first. What is you bank balance? How often do you get laid? What is your ABA #? Have you ever pounded sand? Dimitri |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Dave Urring" > wrote in message .net... > Let's see....The folks here love to eat and cook and shop and > post on the Usenet, surf the Web, and watch TV, from what I've > been able to see. > > None of those things burn a lot of calories, but all this > eating sure takes a lot of them in. > > Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall > we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times > a year they go to the doctor. Just a few thing first. What is you bank balance? How often do you get laid? What is your ABA #? Have you ever pounded sand? Dimitri |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Julia Altshuler wrote:
> Dave Urring wrote: > > >> I haven't been to a doctor in the quarter of a century >> since I adopted a healthful, earth-friendly, and socially >> conscientious diet: pure vegetarian. > > > When you say you haven't been to a doctor, is that because > you've experienced no symptoms that could be helped by a doctor > or because you just haven't gone to a doctor while ignoring > symptoms? I have experienced 'symptoms', occassionally. Even been really sick a couple of times. But I use natural healing helpers and change my ways and the storms pass. They are rare indeed. > If you're 54 years old now and haven't seen a doctor > for 25 years, are you saying you needed a doctor for the first > 29 years of your life? I went to them because I was 'programmed' to, and didn't take good care of myself, which was also 'programmed'. > What for? Flu and colds and gut problems and innoculations and check-ups and the like. Common stuff for meat eaters. I don't get the flu or colds or gut problems anymore. > Were you eating meat then? > Yes. Typical American Diet. > > I'll spell out the obvious. Based on broad epidemiological > research, a meat based diet helps prevent some health troubles > while causing others. The human body can obviously be healthy while eating *natural* animal products though only races like the 'eskimo' can handle a lot of them. The issue for me is not personal health, though mine did improve considerably after becoming a pure vegatiarian, but the health of the planet and the fair distribution of resources. > It is hard to get enough calories with > no animal products That's ridiculous. There are plenty of fat pure vegetarians. > but hard to get enough essential fiber, > vitamins and minerals with no plant based foods. That's just > for starts. There's tons more along those lines. > You can find scientific studies to support either side of this issue. All done by good scientists. But millions of pure vegetarians that are living much more lightly on the earth, and who are *much* healthier than their animal-product consuming siblings, are _real_ evidence for the truth of these matters. Facts speak louder than lab exeriments. > >> The human body does not naturally digest animal products and >> has trouble with excessive proteins. > > > I've heard that over and over, but it has never made any sense > to me. I had duck for dinner last night (in a pepper and > orange broth and a side of stir fried onion, red pepper and > home-grown cabbage in a sauce made of mustard, tamari, cider > vinegar, fresh ginger and thickened with corn starch). After > eating the duck, I felt full. I'm sure I digested it meaning > that my body was able to break down and use the fats and > proteins contained in the duck. If I didn't do that naturally, > how the hell did I do it? > You are playing games with words. Your body and mind have been conditioned/addicted to animal products since infancy. Your body has learned to deal with them, as it is has learned to deal with the toxins you consume by eating industrial food in general, and breathing car exhausts and household cleaners. By "natural", I mean that your body finds plant foods much easier to deal with. (Which you know perfectly well.) I've deleted the rest of this, because, as in your paragraph above, you are being clever with words and trying to avoid the truth here like a lawyer in a court of law. Where innocent people are sometimes executed or imprisoned for life... Here are some links. Do some homework. Or stay ignorant and remain less healthy than you could be; and remain a poor planetary citizen. I am not responsible for *your* behavior, only my own. www.earthsave.org www.madcowboy.com |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring wrote:
<snip> > > By "natural", I mean that your body finds plant foods much easier > to deal with. (Which you know perfectly well.) > Phew, you wouldn't say that if you were around me after eating fresh broccoli! ;-D -- Steve Experience is a wonderful thing. It enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Urring wrote:
<snip> > > By "natural", I mean that your body finds plant foods much easier > to deal with. (Which you know perfectly well.) > Phew, you wouldn't say that if you were around me after eating fresh broccoli! ;-D -- Steve Experience is a wonderful thing. It enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >, Dave
Urring > wrote: > Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall > we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times > a year they go to the doctor. > > I'll kick things off: > > Height: 5'10 > > Weight: 163 > > Age: 54yrs > > Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian > > Doctor-Trips/Year: None > -------------------------------- Your turn: Height: 6'2" Weight: 165 Age: 54 Diet-Style omnivore Doctor-Trips/Year 4 -- Dan Abel Sonoma State University AIS |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >, Dave
Urring > wrote: > Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall > we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times > a year they go to the doctor. > > I'll kick things off: > > Height: 5'10 > > Weight: 163 > > Age: 54yrs > > Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian > > Doctor-Trips/Year: None > -------------------------------- Your turn: Height: 6'2" Weight: 165 Age: 54 Diet-Style omnivore Doctor-Trips/Year 4 -- Dan Abel Sonoma State University AIS |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >, > Dave Urring > wrote: > > > >> Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall >> we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times a >> year they go to the doctor. >> >> I'll kick things off: >> >> Height: 5'10 >> >> Weight: 163 >> >> Age: 54yrs >> >> Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian >> >> Doctor-Trips/Year: None > > -------------------------------- > > > > Your turn: > > Height: 6'2" > > Weight: 165 > > Age: 54 > > Diet-Style omnivore > > Doctor-Trips/Year 4 > > -- Dan Abel Sonoma State University AIS Very good! There are also sickly pure vegetarians. But we are *much* healthier in general than 'omnivores'. The human body can deal with just about anything, including, usually, the 700+ carcinogens found in the typical American's environment. (EPA figures) But it does best on plant foods, for the vast majority of people. Learning to appreciate this new diet-style takes some effort, but it is much like moving to a new country or state or province: You miss the old one for a while, and sometimes, but the new land is very interesting too. And a better place, overall.... And it is *much* easier on an already imperiled environment. www.earthsave.org www.madcowboy.com |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >, > Dave Urring > wrote: > > > >> Let's have everyone post their weight and height here, shall >> we, along with their age and diet-style and how many times a >> year they go to the doctor. >> >> I'll kick things off: >> >> Height: 5'10 >> >> Weight: 163 >> >> Age: 54yrs >> >> Diet-Style: Pure Vegetarian >> >> Doctor-Trips/Year: None > > -------------------------------- > > > > Your turn: > > Height: 6'2" > > Weight: 165 > > Age: 54 > > Diet-Style omnivore > > Doctor-Trips/Year 4 > > -- Dan Abel Sonoma State University AIS Very good! There are also sickly pure vegetarians. But we are *much* healthier in general than 'omnivores'. The human body can deal with just about anything, including, usually, the 700+ carcinogens found in the typical American's environment. (EPA figures) But it does best on plant foods, for the vast majority of people. Learning to appreciate this new diet-style takes some effort, but it is much like moving to a new country or state or province: You miss the old one for a while, and sometimes, but the new land is very interesting too. And a better place, overall.... And it is *much* easier on an already imperiled environment. www.earthsave.org www.madcowboy.com |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Basic wine question... | Wine | |||
| Basic Question | General Cooking | |||
| Basic Burger Question | General Cooking | |||
| Basic Deepfry Question | General Cooking | |||
| very basic question | Winemaking | |||
Linear Mode
