Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #46 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 12:26 AM
Allyb
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

Thanks for the enlightening answers rick and jonathon. Glad to know the
world has two such happy, outstanding human beings in it.

"rick etter" wrote in message
...

"Allyb" wrote in message
...
Jahnu, don't waste your time arguing with them, it'll just give you

stress,
and give them too much enjoyment.

====================
The enjoyment of seeing your ignorance is there whether you respond to us

or
not. The amusment factor doesn't change.


Actually Rick and Jonathon, I'm curious
why you're so interested in arguing with the posters here.

==========================
Not 'arguing' stupid. Just pointing out all the lys that AR/vegan loons
persist in promoting. Their delsuions are just plain ignorance and I'm

here
just to inform.

People don't
typically hang out with those they vehemently disagree with.

=====================
Too bad. You want justification for your ignorance, then keep it for like
minded idiots. You spew it around the world for all to see and you'll be
called on it.

Is it just
something you do for entertainment; are you members of the beef council
looking for converts; is it a mission from God?

==========================
Neither fool. Your ignornace is the reason.


Do vegetarians come to your
"eat meat a lot" newsgroup and pounce on you, so you do this for
retribution? Maybe it's a gang thing. I guess that would make you the
bloods.... (ha ha)

====================
Wow, what wit. I guess that's all you have, eh killer. Obviously you

can't
refute what we say.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jahnu"
Newsgroups:


alt.philosophy,talk.philosophy.misc,talk.politics. animals,misc.rural,uk.busi
ness.agriculture,alt.food.vegan
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 5:12 AM
Subject: No need for farm animals.


On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 20:17:42 GMT, "Rubystars"
wrote:


"Jahnu" wrote in message
snip

Look Jahnu, I'm not saying there wouldn't be more *food* but forcing

people
to go on a vegan diet who don't know how to do so would cause

malnutrition
and at least some deaths from starvation.

I am not an advocate of a vegan diet. I suggest a vegetarian diet,
which includes milk products. Nobody will die from starvation by
becoming a vegetarian. They will rather improve their mental and
physical health significantly by abstaining from meat. On the other
hand a lot of people die before their time from diseases related to
meat-eating.

-jahnu
www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org


"rick etter" wrote in message
...

"Jahnu" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 20:17:42 GMT, "Rubystars"
wrote:


"Jahnu" wrote in message
snip

Look Jahnu, I'm not saying there wouldn't be more *food* but

forcing
people
to go on a vegan diet who don't know how to do so would cause
malnutrition
and at least some deaths from starvation.

I am not an advocate of a vegan diet. I suggest a vegetarian diet,
which includes milk products. Nobody will die from starvation by
becoming a vegetarian. They will rather improve their mental and
physical health significantly by abstaining from meat. On the other
hand a lot of people die before their time from diseases related to
meat-eating.
===============
Another ly. Too bad that's all you have, killer.










  #47 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 01:26 AM
rick etter
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.


"Allyb" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the enlightening answers rick and jonathon. Glad to know the
world has two such happy, outstanding human beings in it.

===========================
Glad to see you're just another loon that can't defend thrie idiocy nor
refute wg=hat we say.
All you have is your cute little posts. Posts that contribute to the death
and suffering of animals btw
for nothing more than your entertainment. Guess animals don't mean as much
to you as you pretend, eh killer?




snippage...




  #48 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 07:25 AM
Fran
 
Posts: n/a
Default ****wit: I am lodging complaints with Mindspring every time you forge my name to a post

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message
"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message


****wit David Harrison forged my name and wrote:


****WIT, you really are going to hear from Mindspring
over this. Stop forging my name to your posts, ****WIT.


(snip) ****WIT's posting under my name
is prohibited by Mindspring's terms-of-use agreement.


Stop being such a whiner you miserable hypocrite. You are contavening so
many of your ISPs "Acceptable Use" policies that you can't legitimately
criticise anyone for anything.


  #49 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 10:32 AM
Jahnu
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 12:49:11 -0500, "rick etter"
wrote:


"Jahnu" wrote in message


Hey meathead, you wouldn't know a sound argument if it fell on your
head in broad daylight.
==============

Yes, I would, and yours isn't one of them...


blah blah

"Can a vegetarian diet improve or restore health? Can it prevent
certain diseases?"

Advocates of vegetarianism have said yes for many years, although they
didin't have much support from modern science until recently. Now,
medical researchers have discovered evidence of a link between
meat-eating and such killers as heart disease and cancer, so they are
giving vegetarianism another look.

Since the 1960s, scientists have suspected that a meat based diet is
somehow related to the development of arteriosclerosis and heart
disease. As early as 1961, the Journal of the American Medical
Association said: 'Ninety to ninety-seven percent of heart diseases
can be prevented by a vegetarian diet.'1 Since that time, several
well-organized studies have scientifically shown that after tobacco
and alcohol, the consumption of meat is the greatest single cause pf
mortality in Western Europe, The USA, Australia, and other affluent
areas of the world.2

The human body is unable to deal with excessive amounts of animal fat
and cholesterol.3 A poll of 214 scientists doing research on
arteriosclerosis in 23 countries showed almost total agreement that
there is a link between diet, serum cholesterol levels, and heart
disease.4 When a person eats more cholesterol than the body needs (as
he usual does with a meat-centered diet), the excess cholesterol
gradually becomes a problem. It accumulates on the inner walls of the
arteries, constricts the flow of blood to the heart, and can lead to
high blood preassure, heart diseases, and strokes.

On the other hand, scientists at the University of Milan and Maggiore
Hospital have shown that vegetable protein may act to keep cholesterol
levels low. In a report to the British medical journal 'The Lancet'
D.C.R. Sirtori concluded that people with the type of high cholesterol
associated with heart disease 'may benefit from a diet in which
protein comes only from vegetables.'5

What about cancer? Research over the past twenty years strongly
suggests a link between meat-eating and cancer of the colon, rectum,
breast, and uterus. These types of cancer are rare among those who eat
little or no meat, such as the Seventh-Day Adventists, Japanese, and
Indians, but are prevalent among meat-eating populations.6

Another article in 'The Lancet' reported, 'People living in the areas
with a high recorded incidence of carcinoma of the colon tend to live
on diets containing large amounts of fat and animal protein; whereas
those who live in areas with a low incidence live on largely
vegetarian diets with little fat or animal matter.'7

Rollo Russell, in his 'Notes on the Causation of Cancer', says, 'I
have found of 25 nations eating mostly flesh, 19 had a high cancer
rate and only one had a low rate, and that of 35 nations eating little
or no flesh, none had a high rate.'8

Why do meat-eaters seem more prone to these diseases? One reason given
by biologists and nutritionists is that man's intestinal tract is
simply not suited for digesting meat. Flesh-eating animals have short
intestinal tracts (3 times the length of the animal's body), to
quickly excrete rapidly decaying toxin-producing meat from the system.
Since plant foods decay more slowly than meat, plant-eaters have
intestines at least six times the length of the body. Man has the long
intestinal tract of a herbivore, so if he eats meat, toxins can
overload kidneys and lead to gout, arthritis, rheumatism, and even
cancer.

And then there are chemical added to meat. As soon as an animal is
slaughtered its flesh begins to putrefy, and after several days it
turns a sickly gray-green. The meat industry masks this discoloration
by adding nitrites, nitrates, and other preservatives to give the meat
a bright red color. But research has shown many of these preservatives
to be carcinogenic.9

And what makes the problem worse is the massive amounts of chemicals
fed to livestock. Gary and Steven Null, in their book, 'Poisons in
your Body', show us something that ought to make anyone think twice
before buying another steak or ham. 'The animals are kept alive and
fattened by continuous administration of tranquilizers, hormones,
antibiotics, and 2.700 other drugs. The process starts even before
birth and continues long after death. Although these drugs will still
be present in the meat when you eat it, the law does not require that
they be listed on the package.'10

Because of findings like this, the American National Academy of
Sciences reported in 1983 that, 'people may be able to prevent many
common types of cancer by eating less fatty meats and more vegetables
and grains.'11

But wait a minute! Weren't we human beings designed to be meat-eaters?
Don't we need animal protein? The answer to both these questions is
no. Although some historians and anthropologists say that man is
historically omnivorous, our anatomical equipment - teeth, jaws, and
digestive system - favors a fleshless diet. The American Dietetic
Association notes that 'most of mankind for most of human history has
lived on vegetarian or near-vegetarian diets.'

And much of the world still lives that way. Even in most
industrialized countries the love affair with meat is less than a
hundred years old. It started with the refrigerator, car, and the 20th
century consumer society.

But even in the 20th century, man's body hasn't adapted to eating
meat. The prominent Swedish scientist Karl von Linne states, 'Man's
structure, external and internal, compared with that of the other
animals, shows that fruit and succulent vegetables constitute his
natural food.'

(The chart I have posted several times compare the anatomy of man with
that of carnivorous and herbivorous animals.)

As for the protein question, Dr.Paavo Airola, a leading authority on
nutrition and natural biology, has this to say: 'The official daily
recommendation for protein has gone down from the 150 grams
recommended twenty years ago to only 45 grams today. Why? Because
reliable worldwide research has shown that we do not need so much
protein, that the actual daily need is only 30 to 45 grams. Protein
consumed in excess of the actual daily need is not only wasted, but
actually causes serious harm to the body and is even causatively
related to such killer diseases as cancer and heart diesase. In order
to obtain 45 grams of protein a day from your diet, you do not have to
eat meat; you can get it from a 100% vegetarian diet of a variety of
grains, lentils, nuts, vegetables, and fruits.'12

Dairy products, grains, beans, and nuts are all concentrated sources
of protein. Cheese, peanuts, and lentils, for instance, contain more
protein per ounce than hamburger, pork, or porter-house steak.

Still nutritians thought until recently that only meat, fish, eggs,
and milk products had complete proteins (containing the 8 amino acids
not produced in the body), and that all vegetable proteins were
incomplete (lacking one or more of these amino acids). But research at
the Karolinska Institute in Sweden and the Max Planck Institute in
Germany has shown that most vegetables, fruits, seeds, nuts, and
grains are excellent sources of complete proteins.

In fact, their proteins are easier to assimilate than those of meat -
and they don't bring with them any toxins. It's nearly impossible to
lack protein if you eat enough natural unrefined food. Remember, the
vegetable kingdom is the real source of ALL protein. Vegetarians
simply eat it 'direct' instead of getting it second-hand from the
vegetarian animals."


References:

Can be had upon request.



www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org
  #50 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 10:42 AM
Jahnu
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 06:31:28 -0600, "Russ Thompson"
wrote:


It IS true. Only meatheads and idiots who have made a business out of
killing animals will object to it.


*** See the "uninformed and ignorant" part of my message. I retract the
"well meaning".
The message I replied to makes claims that are demonstratably false.

Kala Thompson
Farmer
Richland Center, Wi


MAD COWS OR MAD SCIENTISTS?

THE SUPPRESSION OF ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS

By David Crowe

The smoke and flames from funeral pyres for hundreds of thousands of
British cows are fading into distant memory, but the fear of this
disease affecting livestock or wildlife continues to circulate the
globe.

Most people do not realize that there is a non-infectious explanation
for Mad Cow disease and other spongiform encephalopathies and chronic
wasting diseases. This is due to the reluctance of scientists, health
and agriculture bureaucrats and most of the media to question a theory
that affects public health once it is active policy.

One man, Mark Purdey, has turned himself from organic dairy farmer
into an amateur scientist and globe-trotting epidemiologist to
doggedly continue building the major alternative theory.

The infectious theory of Mad Cow disease not only resulted in the
possibly unnecessary destruction of hundreds of thousands of cows, but
it diverted attention from other causes of health problems facing
livestock and wildlife. It created a fear of eating beef (perhaps not
entirely misplaced, but for the wrong reasons) and resulted in the
circulation of tons of toxic materials from the slaughtered cows into
the atmosphere. It also prevented investigations into alternative
solutions to the epidemic of disease, even though these might be
cheaper, more constructive and far less destructive.

The dominant belief is that Mad Cow disease (also known as Bovine
Spongiform Encephalopathy or BSE) and the related diseases Scrapie in
Sheep and vCJD (variant Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease) in humans are
caused by a prion, a mutant protein. These semi-living beings are
thought to be able to withstand temperatures that would kill the
hardiest bacteria, viruses and parasites. It is believed that this
allowed them to be transmitted from sheep to cows through the
rendering of sheep brains into MBM (Meat and Bone Meal) protein
supplements for cows.

An apparently unrelated health problem in cows that existed before Mad
Cow disease was warble fly infestation. These flies lay their eggs in
a cow’s skin, causing health problems and reducing the value of cow
hides. To combat this, in the early 1980’s the British government
mandated the use of heavy doses of organophosphate insecticides. These
were poured in an oil-based liquid along the spinal column of cows. It
was intended that they be systemic, absorbed into the cow’s body, as
it was believed that this was necessary to provide full and enduring
protection from warble flies.

Mark Purdey was one of a handful of farmers who refused to use
organophosphates (such as Phosmet) on their cows in 1982. He was
concerned that the high doses would damage the health of his cows
because the application was so close to the spinal column. He was also
concerned about the health of people who drank milk from his cows. In
1984, Purdey won his court fight, and gained the right to use less
toxic methods to combat warble fly.

When the first cases of neurological problems were reported in cows in
1985, Purdey felt that his avoidance of these pesticides had been
vindicated. However, researchers and the British Government had a
different idea, blaming the rapidly emerging disease on the recently
postulated prion, based on the detection of protein plaques in the
brains of sick cows.

Purdey started to publicly argue his theory that organophosphate
pesticides were actually the cause of neurological problems,
attracting some attention, and seriously annoying the British
scientific establishment and government who were starting to act as if
the infectious theory was fact.

Purdey noted many inconsistencies in the prion theory. Cows were
supposedly infected by feeding on supplements containing the brains of
sheep with Scrapie, yet Shetland Islanders had been eating potted
sheep brains for centuries without similar diseases occurring. He also
noted that British byproducts were exported around the world, yet the
170,000 British cases of BSE far outnumbered the total in the rest of
the world. Cases of BSE had been found on organic farms with cows
brought in from outside, but not on those raised from birth on the
organic farms, even though organic farming rules allow restricted
amounts of the suspect MBM feeds. Other ruminants, such as goats and
sheep, were not affected by Mad Cow-like diseases in England, even
though they were fed MBM supplements. Conversely, several antelopes at
the
London Zoo and cattle at the Liscombe experimental farm developed BSE,
but had never been fed MBM supplements.

When BSE was found in other countries it was in places like Bretagne
in northwest France where organophosphate pesticides were first
encouraged by the French government. As in the UK, BSE cases first
occurred a few years after the pesticide program was initiated. The
lower number of cases may be due to the lower doses used, the use of
annual treatments (as opposed to twice a year in the UK) and because
the program was not mandatory.

As further evidence, the decline in BSE cases in the UK began about
the same time the warble fly eradication program ended. British cases
of vCJD in humans also fit the environmental theory. The disease was
found in some long-term vegetarians and in humans who had never eaten
cow brains. There is no good explanation of why cows could only get
BSE from eating sheep brains, but humans could get it from eating only
other parts of cows.

Although there was a great deal of panic, there were actually few
cases in humans. Purdey noted that about 80% of the 82 cases were in
rural areas, even though more than 80% of Britons live in urban areas.
One cluster in the Weald district of Kent is in a hops growing area
where organophosphate pesticides are used at 100 times average levels
for all crops.

Purdey lobbied for government funding to test his research.
Eventually, he did get a small amount, and Dr. Stephen Whatley of the
University of London was able to show in a test tube that
organophosphates were found to produce 3 of the 4 protein
transformations required to create the mutant prion protein. A
victory, but also a major defeat. The UK BSE inquiry admitted that
"the door is not yet closed on the possibility that OPs
[organophosphates] played a role in rendering cattle susceptible to
BSE infectivity," but the infectious theory was still cast in the
primary role because of the inability of Whatley to show all four
transformations.

Purdey was not about to give up. He felt that there must be a
co-factor that he had missed. To find it he went on a tour of places
in the world where spongiform encepalopathies had existed in animals
or humans for some time, collecting samples of soil and feed. In these
places, where organophosphates had little or no use, he found
extremely high Manganese levels and low Copper, Selenium, Zinc and
Iron. He did not find this in geographically similar areas where no
illness was found. The causes of this mineral imbalance varied,
including acid rain, volcanic emissions, lead-free gasoline
production, emissions from steel, glass, ceramic, dye and munitions
manufacturing and the take-off zones of major airports.

BSE-like diseases were found in Colorado among deer and elk in an area
of the front ranges where overpopulation often forced starving animals
to graze on pine needles. These showed very high levels of Manganese,
perhaps due to acid rain from upwind smelters. In Iceland, Purdey
found Scrapie associated with similar high Manganese/low Copper soil
conditions. In Slovakia the two clusters of CJD are close to
ferromanganese factories and glassworks (heavy users of Manganese).
These cases may well be related to the almost eradicated occupational
disease known as "Manganese Madness" which occurred among
miners exposed to poorly ventilated working conditions. Its symptoms
and brain pathology are similar to spongiform encephalopathies.

Purdey was not just randomly testing for mineral abnormalities. Copper
is a constituent of the normal prion protein, and Manganese could be a
replacement when Copper is deficient, or when Manganese is present at
high levels, such as in many mineral supplements for cattle. It is at
this point that Organophosphates re-enter the theory. They can remove
copper from the body, leaving the door open for Manganese (or other
similar metals) to replace it in the prion protein. This results in a
non-functional conformation of the molecule, particularly when
Manganese is from the 2+ form to the oxidative 3+ and 4+ forms.

Recently, Purdey traveled to Groote Eylandt, an island north-east of
Australia where 25% of the world’s Manganese is currently produced.
About one in thirty people in the largely aboriginal Agurugu village,
where the fine mine dust regularly settles most heavily, have Groote
Syndrome, a progressive neurological disease. Researchers supported by
the mining company hypothesize a genetic defect introduced by
Portuguese sailors 300 years ago, even though this theory does not
explain why some white mine workers also have this syndrome, nor does
it explain the emergence of this syndrome since open pit mining began
in the 1960s.

Purdey’s theory was now multi-factorial. Organophosphates were a major
factor, but the copper/manganese imbalance could be exacerbated by
animal feeds or mineral supplements. Similar situations could occur
where the soil is low in the antioxidant metals and high in Manganese.

After extending the theory, David Brown, a researcher at Cambridge
University performed experiments that incorporated high Manganese and
low Copper conditions and was able to reproduce all four protein
changes in vitro, thus providing full laboratory confirmation that
Purdey's theory is at least plausible.

At the height of the Mad Cow frenzy, the British government invited
Purdey to make a detailed proposal for research funding. Predictably,
after sitting on the proposal for more than a year, they rejected it,
and then funded two of its reviewers for some of the studies suggested
by it. A cynic might conclude that they had asked for a grant proposal
solely to have Purdey reveal his arguments and thoughts in full
detail, so that they could then fund some ‘reliable’ researchers to
debunk them, without giving Purdey resources that might strengthen his
arguments.

Interest in Purdey’s ideas is still growing in a grass roots fashion,
although slowly, and usually beneath the radar of major media outlets.
Purdey has a small grant from the US Fats and Protein Research
Foundation, supervised by Dr. Larry Berger of the Animal Science Lab
in Urbana, Illinois. Purdey recently gave 14 lectures in Japan, some
Slovakian researchers are studying the influence of Manganese and
Copper on familial and sporadic cases of CJD. Some British
universities are also quietly investigating in this area.

Purdey is attempting to obtain brain samples from Groote Eylandt to
test for manganese and copper levels, and has persuaded one local GP
there to see whether a chelating drug that removes Manganese will have
beneficial effects.

Purdey is now investigating whether ultra-violet light is an
additional factor in the development of SE diseases, perhaps in
concert with a haze of terpines from the pine trees that often grow at
these elevations. He hypothesizes that the eyes could act as a
trigger, because of their concentration of nerves
exposed to light.

Purdey and other researchers have turned up many potential factors
that could stimulate the development of spongiform encephalopathies
and chronic wasting diseases. If some or all components of this theory
prove to be valid, the solutions to these devastating diseases could
be incredibly simple. It may also open new avenues of research into
mental illness. Supplementation of cattle feeds with minute amounts of
copper and regulation of the manganese levels could work near
miracles, at minimal cost. Chelation could be used to reduce the
levels found in people or animals suffering from these illnesses. Yet,
it is likely that governments and the scientific establishment will
continue to concentrate their efforts almost exclusively on infectious
agents and genetic defects, suppressing anybody brave enough to argue
against them on this or other health issues.

_______________

Mark Purdey can be reached via his website:
http://www.markpurdey.com or by email to
.

Further Reading:

The Inquiry into BSE and variant CJD in the United
Kingdom:
http://www.bse.org.uk.2000

Purdey M. Ecosystems supporting clusters of sporadic
TSEs demonstrate excesses of the radical-generating
divalent cation manganese and deficiencies of
antioxidant cofactors Cu, Se, Fe, Zn. Medical
Hypotheses, 2000; 54(2), 278-306

Brown DR et al. Consequences of Manganese replacement
of Copper for prion protein function and proteinase
resistance. EMBO J, 2000 Mar 15; 19(6): 1180-6.

Purdey M. The Purdey Environmental Home Page:
http://www.markpurdey.com



www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org


  #51 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 11:01 AM
Jahnu
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 12:50:50 -0500, "rick etter"
wrote:


snippage of more AR/vegan BS, lys and delusions. Too bad that's all you've
got, killer.



How Now Mad Cow?

by Professor Richard Lacey
The risk of mass infection of BSE in humans is very real.

Richard Lacey is Professor of Clinical Microbiology at Leeds
University. He has a degree in medicine from Cambridge University and
a Ph.D in clinical microbiology from the Faculty of Medicine at the
University of Bristol. As well as publishing over 200 papers in
scientific and medical journals, Professor Lacey has lectured
extensively overseas and broadcast frequently on radio and television.
His work has won him a number of prizes, including the Evian Health
Prize for Medicine and the Caroline Walker Award for Science.
Professor Lacey has been an advisor to the British Government and is
widely recognised as a world authority on mad cow disease.

What is BSE and how did it start?

BSE, better known as mad cow disease, stands for bovine spongiform
encephalopathy, an infectious and incurable disease which slowly
attacks the brain and nervous system of cattle. Spongiform
encephalopathies are nothing new and are not confined to cattle.
Scrapie, the form of the disease found in sheep, has been common in
Britain for the past 200 years and a human version, Kuru, was once
epidemic in tribal New Guinea. By late 1994, a handful of people in
Britain had died from another human version, Creutzfeldt Jakob disease
(CJD).

BSE has been epidemic in British cattle for the last ten years. The
first confirmed cases were reported in late 1986 but it is believed
that the first case may have occurred in Hampshire in 1985. By early
1995 it had been identified in almost 150,000 cattle and more than
half of all British herds.

The exact origin of BSE is not known, but simplistic claims that it
came from sheep are now discredited. BSE is an incurable disease
caused by a mystery 'infectious agent'. The agent is not a virus or
bacteria - nobody knows what it is. It has broken the most basic rules
of biology. Any cure still lies at the very limits of present-day
science.

What does it do?

The period between becoming infected and showing symptoms for
spongiform encephalopathies is long in relation to the life span of
the animal or human involved. For example, Kuru in humans can take as
long as 30 years before the person becomes visibly ill. The disease
bores into the brain and nervous system very slowly but once
established it rapidly causes dementia and death. No treatment works.
Post mortems show the brain to be sponge-like and full of holes, hence
the name 'spongiform'.

In cattle, the first signs occur when the cow is put under any slight
pressure or stress. Movement to a milking station might induce fear,
panic and stumbling and the infected animal may stand away from the
rest of the herd, holding it's head in an awkward posture. Despite a
good appetite, the amount of milk she produces may drop and she
usually loses a lot of weight. As the muscles waste away, there may be
twitchings, quiverings and shaking. Strange behaviour can occur, such
as grinding teeth and sometimes the moo is odd. The cow over-reacts to
touch and becomes very jumpy. Eventually, she will shake violently,
stagger and in the end be completely unable to stand up.

It is the combination of a drop in milk and the fear that the cow will
fall and be unable to stand again that makes the farmer call in the
vet. If the animal does not recover, it is slaughtered and the head
(with it's nervous tissue) is removed for examination as it is
officially believed that this is the only infected part of the animal.
This is unlikely as flesh also contains nervous tissue. It also
ignores the possibility of the disease being passed from mother to
calf.

The rest of the cow's body should be burnt but as many as 30% of
infected carcasses end up in landfill sites where they could be
disturbed by tractors, bulldozers, dogs or rodents. As BSE is an
extremely strong disease, it remains infective even after years in the
soil. When cattle are killed for food, the same procedure applies -
the head (and some other parts such as the spinal cord, spleen and
thymus - 'specified offal') is removed. The Government say that people
will not be at risk when they eat cows but the flesh (containing
infected nervous tissue) is eaten and the bones are eventually made
into gelatine which finds it's way into many products.

How widespread is BSE?

By late 1994, the disease had been identified in nearly 150,000
animals and in just over half of all cattle herds in Britain. Some
scientists including myself believe that the only way to tackle the
problem would be to destroy all herds with cattle incubating the
disease. BSE has affected all breeds including, significantly, Jersey
and Guernsey cattle on their respective islands. The black and white
Friesian Holstein cows are the most commonly affected simply because
there are far more of them in Britain than other breeds. The youngest
case so far recorded of a cow showing the symptoms of BSE was 20
months and the oldest 18 years.

The cattle industry in Britain is under constant pressure to produce
more milk and dairy products at the lowest possible cost because we,
the public, demand it. The price of our daily pinta is paid for dearly
by the suffering of animals. To provide as much milk as possible, cows
are often fed protein-rich concentrated food made from the carcasses
of other dead animals that have been sent to knackers yards or
rendering plants. Cows only produce milk when they have had a calf.
After a nine month pregnancy, the calf is removed within a day or two
of birth. A few months later, while still producing milk, the cow is
artificially inseminated again. Cows have around three or four
pregnancies before their milk yield begins to drop.They are eventually
slaughtered at six or seven years old, even though its natural
lifespan would be 20 years or more. Most parts of the cow are used to
make burgers, sausages, pies, stocks and pet food. Until 1989, this
also included the brain.

More than 90 per cent of BSE cases have been in cows rather than
bulls, simply because cows live longer. Beef animals are usually
slaughtered around three years old and veal calves at six months. As
BSE appears when the animal is around four to five years old, most
beef animals are slaughtered before they are old enough to show
symptoms, although they may have the disease. Is BSE a danger to
humans?

All the evidence so far suggests that humans are not immune from
infection. The Fore tribe live in Papua New Guinea, a place unexplored
by Westerners until the second half of the twentieth century.
Cannibalism, especially by women hoping to increase fertility, was
common until very recently, and this led to an outbreak of 'Kuru', a
human form of scrapie. Kuru killed up to 80 per cent of women in some
villages but how it first started is unknown. Because it occurred
within families and mostly amongst women, it was first thought that
Kuru was inherited genetically. Scientists have since proved beyond
doubt that Kuru is infectious and that the disease was transmitted by
eating meat, in this case human meat. If BSE can be transmitted to
humans then the resulting illness is expected to be like our own form
of Kuru - Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD). As a spongiform
encephalopathy, this is again a disease of the brain and is always
fatal.

Like Kuru, patients first show symptoms of mental changes, such as
problems with co-ordination, recent memory loss and slurred speech.
Sometimes obvious twitching of muscles can be seen, the facial
expression becomes fixed and the person may stumble and fall over.
Over the next few weeks, the person becomes confused and unaware,
unable to read or recognise even close relatives. Towards the end of
the illness the patient is unconscious and not reacting to anyone,
often having fits or jerking spasms and is doubly incontinent, blind,
deaf and speechless. Patients continue to be fed but are rarely placed
on a respirator nor given antibiotics for infections, particularly of
the lung.

It is the latter which usually results in death. During the post
mortem, extreme care must be taken because the disease is ncredibly
infectious. The pathologist wears a mask, goggles, gloves, boots and a
plastic apron and any instruments that have been used on patients
suffering from CJD have to be thoroughly sterilised. For example, the
silver needles used for the EEG (brain examination) must be treated
with high pressure steam for prolonged periods of time or put through
six successive heat cycles in a steriliser. Even then there is no
guarantee of destroying the infection. If contaminated instruments are
used on another patient (which they will be if the person was not
visibly ill with CJD), the disease can, and indeed has been,
transferred. CJD is so feared by some people in the medical profession
that they have refused to perform autopsies on patients suspected of
dying from it. Some hospitals have even refused to admit patients
suffering from it.

What is the connection?

It is now known that regular eaters of veal (and other beef products)
are 13 times more likely to die of CJD than those who don't. The
prospect of a huge number of people dying from BSE as CJD next century
is very real; that is, CJD and BSE are one and the same. What is being
done? Very little. The British Government has hidden the facts and
fiddled the evidence at every stage of the investigation into mad cow
disease. It has told expert scientists, including it's own advisors,
to keep quiet in case the hugely profitable meat industry suffers. In
May 1988, the government set up The Southwood Committee to examine the
risks of BSE to both animal and human health. Extraordinarily, it had
no experts on spongiform encephalopathies and none were consulted.
Although experts in their own areas, none of the members of the
Southwood Committee had done any research into spongiform diseases. A
month after the first meeting, the Government, on the advice of the
committee, ordered the compulsory slaughter and destruction of
carcasses of all affected cattle. It was already too late. Between
the date of the first known case of BSE in late 1986 and the middle
of 1988, at least 600 obviously diseased cows (plus an unknown number
of animals not yet obviously ill) had been slaughtered and their meat
had found its way onto supermarket shelves.

Half the normal price of carcasses was paid in compensation, which
encouraged farmers not to report suspect cattle. The real extent of
the problem remained unknown. The second recommendation of the
Southwood Committee was to set up another committee to do more
research, which simply admitted that the problem was too big. The next
meeting of the committee was five months later, some indication of how
serious the Government regarded the problem. The report admitted that
spongiform encephalopathies are a danger to humans and stated: 'With
the very long incubation period of spongiform encephalopathies in
humans, it may be a decade or more before complete reassurance can be
given.' The Southwood Committee went on to say how they thought the
disease was passed on, saying that eating was low down on the list of
possible reasons. While admitting that all cows had got the disease by
eating, they were suggesting one rule for cattle and another for
humans. It was easy for a cow to get BSE through eating but very
difficult for humans to get CJD by doing the same.

Two other general conclusions of the Southwood report were that the
risk of vertical transmission of BSE (passing the disease from mother
to calf) was non-existent (since proved incorrect) and that cattle
would prove to be a 'dead-end host', which means the disease would
stop at cows and not infect other species. This introduces the
revolutionary biological concept of a non-infectious infection. Cattle
are not a dead-end host. BSE has been spread to other species and this
was known at the time of the report. The Southwood report stated that
'...if our assessment of these likelihoods (of possible human
infection) are incorrect, the implications would be extremely
serious.'

Their assessments have been shown to be incorrect. We do have a
terrible crisis on our hands. Who cares? Evidence that the Government
was less than concerned about the risk to the British public comes
from the Tyrell Report, produced by the research committee set up as a
result of the Southwood Report. For example, this said that the brains
of cattle normally sent for slaughter should be checked to see if some
animals had BSE and were not yet ill with it. This would have shown
how big the problem really was. Not surprisingly, this has never been
done, despite numerous requests from the UK Parliament, because it
would have been 'too expensive'. Too expensive for the meat industry,
that is.

Once consumers realised that they were eating infected meat, profits
would have plummeted. The report also recommended monitoring all UK
cases of CJD over the next 20 years (as a matter of 'urgency'!) to
reassure the public that there was no link with BSE. At present
'monitoring' means that a researcher checks death certificates for
CJD. That's it as far as the UK Department of Health is concerned. Of
course, a real investigation was not planned because it would admit
that the government was scared of a major public health problem.
It finished by saying that more research was needed and that the
controls at that time to prevent the disease spreading were not
enough.

Overall, the report was an excellent analysis of the situation as it
was in 1989 but many of the proposals it made were ignored by the
government. This report, dated June 1989, was not released until
January 9 1990, showing just how urgent the Government thought it was.
By this time they had accepted that they did not know whether the
disease could pass from cow to calf whether it was possible other
species could get BSE, or that the recent suggested increase in sheep
scrapie was the cause of the rise in BSE cases. In April 1990, the
Tyrell Committee became 'permanent', a surprising development as,
according to the government, BSE was about to disappear. The feed ban
As part of the cannibalistic merry-go-round that is an economically
essential part of the meat industry, all the bits of animals from
slaughterhouses unsuitable for human consumption are boiled up to
produce fat and protein. The protein makes animal feed.

Apart from the obvious high risk of different infections being passed
on, it seems strange that nobody had actually questioned the
biological sense of forcing naturally vegetarian animals to become
carnivores, eating the remains of other animals. This is probably what
has caused the spread of BSE.

In June 1988, the government imposed a six-month ban on feeding animal
protein to cows and sheep as it was thought this was the most likely
way these animals would become infected. In December, the ban was
extended for 12 months and laws stopped the sale of milk from cattle
suspected of having the disease. Banning infected feed did not stop
the rise of BSE. Cases rose from 500 per month in January 1989 to 900
per month in December 1989. The 'mysterious agent' that causes
spongiform encephalopathies has been found in many of the organs and
tissues of animals. For example, cells from the spleen, thymus and
tonsils ('specified offal' banned for use in animal feed in 1989)
enter the blood and find their way to many organs including the liver
and bones. The bones of old cows are one of the major sources of the
protein gelatine, used in many foods from peppermints to pork pies.

The greatest risk could come from bones because the procedures used to
concentrate and purify gelatine could create a stronger source of BSE.
With the passing from mother to calf of BSE confirmed in 1993/94,
blood could also contain the disease, at least as far as cattle are
concerned. The problem, of course, did not go away. The number of BSE
cases per month rose from 800 in January 1990 to 1,500 in December
1990. The Southwood Committee had predicted a maximum of 400 cases per
month.

We were wrong but we're not sorry...

After four years of Government reassurances that BSE could not infect
other species, tests carried out in February 1990 proved the opposite.
BSE was transmitted to mice by feeding and to other cattle by
injection. Cattle were no longer 'dead-end hosts'. The disease had
never been previously reported in cats but in May of the same year, a
domestic cat died from a spongiform encephalopathy. Even then the
Government stuck to its guns and denied that spongiform
encephalopathies could jump species. In fact, that is the very
nature of the disease. By the time 52 other cats had died in July, the
government finally admitted that they had contracted the disease
through eating 'pet food'. The question was no longer 'Can BSE affect
other species?' but 'How many species will it affect?'

A month before, in January, trading standards officers revealed that
infected cattle were still being sent to market because farmers were
still only being given half of the normal price for their cows. A
Ministry official denied that BSE was finding it's way into our food
but some people weren't quite so convinced. In April 1990, Humberside
County Council banned the use of British beef in school meals. The
number of known cases of BSE passed the 10,000 mark.

In April 1991, the Ministry of Agriculture predicted that a peak in
the number of BSE cases would occur in 1991 and the disease would
disappear by 1994. By the end of the year, 25,025 cases had been
confirmed in Great Britain, providing the first indications that,
despite government claims to the contrary, the disease was being
passed from cow to calf. The following year, BSE was transmitted
experimentally to seven out of eight species of mammal, including pigs
and marmoset monkeys. In four experiments, this was by eating. A puma
and a cheetah were also reported to have died of the disease. Evidence
was mounting of an uncontrollable epidemic, with serious implications
for humans. CJD, the human form of BSE, claimed the lives of two dairy
farmers who had tended herds with BSE infected cattle. The number of
human CJD cases in Great Britain was nearly ten times higher than the
annual number recorded 25 years earlier and twice as high as the
number recorded five years earlier.

Vicky Rimmer, a 15 year old Welsh girl, developed the symptoms of CJD,
despite no family history of the disease or medical mishaps such as
faulty blood transfusion. She was also extremely young considering the
very long period it normally takes for symptoms to show. This meant
that the disease was most probably contracted from an external source,
more than likely food. A doctor from the CJD surveillance unit
examined Vicky and told her mother not to make her daughter's
casepublic. According to the Daily Mirror (January 25 1994) he told
her she should think of the economy and the Common Market. More than
17,000 cases of BSE were confirmed in cattle born after the feed ban,
with 500 cases known to have come from mothers which later developed
BSE.

This meant that BSE was infecting cows by means other than infected
food. However, the government tries to explain this by blaming
farmers, feed compounders and renderers for breaking the law - they
accuse them of continuing to put ground-up sheep and cattle into
cattle feed. This is manifest nonsense and is the last ditch attempt
to deny the occurrence of vertical transfer of BSE (where the mother
passes on BSE to her calf in the womb). The existence of vertical
transfer means that the infectious agent must be in the cow's blood
and will therefore be found in virtually all beef products. In 1994
the government had still taken no action to control cattle being moved
from BSE infected herds to other herds, nor had they taken any other
steps to control the epidemic. The total number of BSE cases confirmed
exceeded 137,000 by the end of August 1994 - more than six times the
number predicted by the Southwood Committee in their 'worst case
scenario'. However, in April 1994, it was admitted that cows did pass
BSE on to their calves.

What can we conclude from this?

Basically two things. Firstly, almost 10 years after BSE was first
identified, expert knowledge is still virtually nil. And, as if to
cover this up, all the available evidence suggests that the government
has carefully manipulated the facts to avoid doing anything about it.
The main reason is to protect the huge vested interests of the meat
industry - the cost of compensation for replacing six million
infected cattle could run into billions of pounds. The bad
international publicity from this would endanger UK food exports,
tourism and even much of our industry. Secondly, there is a very real
risk of mass infection in the human population. The government has
made sure of that.

And while the time bomb of the twentieth century equivalent to bubonic
plague ticks away, we all have to take responsibility into our own
hands. The simple and safest answer of course is to stop eating
animals. In the absence of any accurate, reliable or simply truthful
information coming from 'the experts', the choice has to be yours.

www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org
  #52 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 11:10 AM
Jahnu
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 15:59:44 GMT, Jonathan Ball
wrote:

Jahnu wrote:
It's funny how meat heads


Oh, *there* is a calm, rational, discussion-advancing
expression.


You mean like this one:

Russ Thompson wrote:


"That's but a minor impediment to the irrational
religious fanatics known as "animal rights activists".

always go balistic


I didn't. I described, rather, how so-called "ethical"
vegetarians have no regard for the constitution, in
their fanatical wish to impose their views on others.


Constitution? You forget I am from Europe. I couldn't care less about
your constitution.

and have to resort to all
kinds of imbecile and moronic responses when the subject of
vegetarianism comes up. I wonder why that is.


It isn't. You have invented it in your sick, sordid
imagination.


Invented? Look at the responses I got from the scientific facts I sent
about the harmful effects of meat-eating. Are we being a little
selective here?

I guess they have
neither empathy for other living entities


False.


Anyone who supports the mass slaughter of animals in the modern
consumer culture must be completely devoid of any empathy towards
other living entities.

It isn't. You are an irrational, overwrought crackpot.


I am merely stating facts, that's all. But note how hysterical the
meat heads get when some one dares point out their nefarious ways.

You exist, barely, at the fringe of civilized
society. The truly strange thing is, you voluntarily
went out onto the fringe.


Now, that's real rational
www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org
  #53 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 11:12 AM
Jahnu
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 12:51:40 -0500, "rick etter"
wrote:

Another ly. Too bad that's all you have, killer.



HOW TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH A MEAT EATER

The New York Times, Tuesday, June 20, 1989



The Hunger Argument

Number of people worldwide who will die of starvation this year: 60
million.

Number of people who could be adequately fed with the grain saved if
Americans reduced their intake of meat by 10 perc.: 60 million

Human beings in America: 243 million

Number of people who could be fed with grain and soybeans now eaten by
U.S. livestock: 1.3 billion

Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by people: 20

Percentage of corn grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 80

Percentage of oats grown in the U.S. eaten by livestock: 95

Percentage of protein waste by cycling grain through livestock: 99

How frequently a child starves to death: every 2 seconds

Pounds of potatoes that can be grown on an ac 20.OOO

Pounds of beef produced on an ac 165

Percentage of U.S. farmland devoted to beef production: 56

Pounds of grain and soybeans needed to produce a pound of beef: 16



The Environmental Argument

Cause of global warming: greenhouse effect

Primary cause of greenhouse effect: carbon dioxide emissions from
fossil fuels.

Fossil fuels needed to produce a meat-centered diet vs. a meat-free
diet: 50 times more

Percentage of U.S. topsoil lost to date: 75

Percentage of U.S. topsoil loss directly related to livestock raising:
85

Number of acres of U.S. forest cleared for cropland to produce
meat-centered diet: 260 million

Amount of meat U.S. imports annually from Costa Rica, El Salvador,
Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: 200 million pounds

Average per capita meat consumption in Costa Rica, El Salvador,
Guatemala, Honduras and Panama: less than eaten by average U.S.
housecat.

Area of tropical rainforest consumed in every 1/4 pound hamburger: 55
sq.ft.

Current rate of species extinction due to destruction of tropical
rainforests for meat grazing and other uses: 1.000 per year



The Cancer Argument

Increased risk of breast cancer for women who eat meat 4 times a week
vs. less than once a week: 4 times

For women who eat eggs daily vs. less than once a week: 3 times

Increased risk of fatal ovarian cancer for women who eat eggs 3 or
more times a week vs. less than once a week: 3 times

Increased risk of fatal prostate cancer for men who eat meat daily vs.
sparingly or not at all: 3.6 times



The Natural Resources Argument

Use of more than half of all water used for all purposes in the U.S.:
livestock portion.

Amount of water used in production of the average steer: sufficient to
float a destroyer.

Gallons to produce a pound of wheat: 25

Gallons to produce a pound of meat: 2.500

Cost of common hamburger if water used by meat industry was not
subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer: 35 dollars a pound

Current cost of pound of protein from beefsteak, if water was no
longer subsidized: 89 dollars

Years the world's known oil reserves would last if every human ate a
meat-centered diet: 13

Years they would last if human beings no longer ate meat: 260

Barrels of oil imported into U.S. daily: 6.8 million

Percentage of fossil fuel returned as food energy by most efficient
factory farming of meat: 34.5

Percentage returned from least efficient plant food: 32.8

Percentage of raw materials consumed by U.S. to produce present
meat-centered diet: 33



The Cholesterol Argument

Number of U.S. medical schools: 125

Number requiring a course in nutrition: 30

Nutrition training received by average U.S. physician during four
years in medical school: 25 hours

Most common cause of death in U.S.: heart attack

How frequently a heart attack kills in U.S.: every 45 seconds

Average U.S. man's risk of death from heart attack: 50 perc.

Risk for average U.S. man who avoids the meat-centered diet: 15 perc.

Meat industry claims you should not be concerned about your blood
cholesterol if it is: normal

Your risk of dying of a disease caused by clogged arteries if your
blood cholesterol is 'normal': over 50 perc.



The Antibiotic Argument

Percentage of U.S. antibiotics fed to livestock: 55

Percentage of staphylococci infections resistant to penicillin in
1960: 13

Percentage resistant in 1988: 91

Response of European Economic Community to routine feeding of
antibiotics to livestock: ban

Response of U.S. meat and pharmaceutical industries to routine feeding
of antibiotics to livestock: full and complete support


The Pesticide Argument

Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by grains:
1

Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by fruits:
4

Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet suppl. by dairy
products: 23

Percentage of pesticide residues in the U.S. diet supplied by meat: 55

Pesticide contamination of breast milk from meat-eating mothers vs.
non meat-eating: 35 times higher

What USDA tells us: meat is inspected

Percentage of slaughtered animals inspected for residues of toxin
chemicals including dioxin and DDT: less than 0.00004



The Ethical Argument

Number of animals killed for meat per hour in U.S.: 500.000

Occupation with highest turnover rate in U.S.: slaughterhouse worker

Occupation with highest rate of on-the-job injury in U.S:
slaughterhouse worker

Cost to render animal unconscious with captive bolt pistol before
slaughter.: 1 cent

Reason given by meat industry for non using that pistol: too expensive

The Survival Argument

Athlete to win Ironman Triathlon more than twice: Dave Scott (6 time
winner) Food choices of Dave Scott: Vegetarian

Largest meat eater than ever lived: Tyrannosaurus Rex

Last sighting of Tyrannosaurus Rex: 100.000.000 B.C.


Famous pop stars - vegetarians:
-------------------------------
Candice Bergen, David Bowie, Paul Mc Cartney, Darryl Hannah, Janet
Jackson, k.d.lang, Sting

'I am a great eater of beef, and I believe that does harm to my wit.'
--William Shakespeare "Twelfth Night," Act I, Scene 3






www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org
  #54 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 11:34 AM
Jahnu
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 14:02:18 -0500, "Allyb" wrote:

I care because I think it's really interesting what you do. I'm not nearly
as interested in fantasy as I am about reality. I know you're probably
going to have something biting to say about that since you think you know
the lifestyle I live, but it's the truth. I'm honestly curious about what
motivates you. Maybe I should have been an anthropologist............ I'm
very interested in atypical responses to stimuli. I think it's atypical
that anti-vegans spend so much time in a vegan newsgroup, you piqued my
interest. I'm not a one issue girl ya know.


The reason that they hang out in Vegan news groups and spew their BS
is simply because they don't have anywhere else to vent all the anger
and envy that come from their bad diet. I mean, just imagine what it
does to your brain to eat a Big Mac (which is basically a piece of
stool in a bun garnished with snot), and these guys grew up on the
stuff. On top of that they are probably Americans which means they
were placed in front of the TV as soon as they could keep their little
wobbly heads up by themselves and then spoonfed with Disney and Power
Rangers. No wonder they are brain dead.


www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org
  #55 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 01:56 PM
Jahnu
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 13:34:46 -0500, "Allyb" wrote:

Jahnu, don't waste your time arguing with them, it'll just give you stress,
and give them too much enjoyment.


Allyb, I appreciate your concern, but it doesn't distress me to smash
and crush meat-head atheists with facts. It gives me great pleasure
to see how they squirm and try to dodge the facts with their lame and
imbecile responses. But it never ceases to amaze me that they don't
seem to get how idiotic and uninformed they sound.

Actually Rick and Jonathon, I'm curious
why you're so interested in arguing with the posters here. People don't
typically hang out with those they vehemently disagree with. Is it just
something you do for entertainment; are you members of the beef council
looking for converts; is it a mission from God? Do vegetarians come to your
"eat meat a lot" newsgroup and pounce on you, so you do this for
retribution? Maybe it's a gang thing. I guess that would make you the
bloods.... (ha ha)


The fact is that they are just a bunch of cowards who feel very brave
behind their little key-boards. The only way they can find a voice is
here on usenet because in real life nobody (with a brain) cares for
what they have to say.



www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org


  #56 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 01:59 PM
Tim
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.


"Jahnu" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 13:34:46 -0500, "Allyb" wrote:

Jahnu, don't waste your time arguing with them, it'll just give you

stress,
and give them too much enjoyment.


Allyb, I appreciate your concern, but it doesn't distress me to smash
and crush meat-head atheists with facts. It gives me great pleasure
to see how they squirm and try to dodge the facts with their lame and
imbecile responses. But it never ceases to amaze me that they don't
seem to get how idiotic and uninformed they sound.

Actually Rick and Jonathon, I'm curious
why you're so interested in arguing with the posters here. People don't
typically hang out with those they vehemently disagree with. Is it just
something you do for entertainment; are you members of the beef council
looking for converts; is it a mission from God? Do vegetarians come to

your
"eat meat a lot" newsgroup and pounce on you, so you do this for
retribution? Maybe it's a gang thing. I guess that would make you the
bloods.... (ha ha)


The fact is that they are just a bunch of cowards who feel very brave
behind their little key-boards. The only way they can find a voice is
here on usenet because in real life nobody (with a brain) cares for
what they have to say.



www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org


Ha ha. I see that you avoid "the facts" when it suits you. Once again - how
do you suggest that people in Northern climates survive without eating
animals? Or should they simply die because they don't fit in with your vegan
ideology?


  #57 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 02:40 PM
Russ Thompson
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

It IS true. Only meatheads and idiots who have made a business out of
killing animals will object to it.


*** See the "uninformed and ignorant" part of my message. I retract the
"well meaning".
The message I replied to makes claims that are demonstratably false.

Kala Thompson
Farmer
Richland Center, Wi


MAD COWS OR MAD SCIENTISTS?

THE SUPPRESSION OF ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS


(snip a long irrelevent artical that has nothing to do with the current
discussion)

What is you point in changing the subject? Couldn't find any support for
you origional claims?

Kala Thompson
Farmer
Richland Center, Wi, USA





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
  #58 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 02:42 PM
Russ Thompson
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

You mean like this one:

Russ Thompson wrote:


"That's but a minor impediment to the irrational
religious fanatics known as "animal rights activists".


I didn't write that.

Kala Thompson
Farmer
Richland Center, WI USA




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
  #59 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 03:14 PM
Jahnu
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 08:40:58 -0600, "Russ Thompson"
wrote:

MAD COWS OR MAD SCIENTISTS?

THE SUPPRESSION OF ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS


(snip a long irrelevent artical that has nothing to do with the current
discussion)

What is you point in changing the subject? Couldn't find any support for
you origional claims?


It has everything to do with the current discussion.


www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org
  #60 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 04-01-2004, 03:15 PM
Jahnu
 
Posts: n/a
Default No need for farm animals.

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 08:42:57 -0600, "Russ Thompson"
wrote:

You mean like this one:

Russ Thompson wrote:


"That's but a minor impediment to the irrational
religious fanatics known as "animal rights activists".


I didn't write that.

Kala Thompson
Farmer
Richland Center, WI USA


I know, but someone did. Why don't you complain about him being
irrational?


www.krishna.com
www.iskcon.org


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lab-Grown Meat May Save a Lot More than Farm Animals’ Lives U.S. Janet B. General Cooking 25 09-04-2017 05:26 PM
How producing “ethical, zero-harm” plant food for vegans and vegetarians kills more animals than, well, actually killing animals for the purpose of eating them. ImStillMags General Cooking 87 05-01-2012 11:14 PM
"Consideration for the lives of farm animals" - meaningless tripe Fred C. Dobbs[_3_] Vegan 13 24-06-2010 08:36 PM
Non-existent - but NOT imaginary - farm animals [email protected] Vegan 70 10-02-2005 03:58 AM
A day on the farm Boron Elgar General Cooking 30 05-11-2003 05:35 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"

 

Copyright © 2017