 |
|
| 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 | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
No need for farm animals.
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 22:42:31 GMT, Jonathan Ball
> wrote: >Stuff your Krishna phony baloney up your ass. Here is a chart done by A.D. Andrews in "Fit Food for men", (Chicago: American Hygiene Society, 1970) MEAT EATER PLANT EATER HUMAN has claws no claws no claws no skin pores; perspires through perspires through perspires through skin pores skin pores tongue. sharp, pointed no sharp, pointed no sharp, pointed front teeth front teeth front teeth small salivary well-developed well-developed glands in the salivary glands salivary glands mouth acid saliva; alkaline saliva; alkaline sal- no ptyalin much ptyalin iva; much enzyme enzyme ptyalin enz. no flat back flat back molar flat back molar teeth teeth molar teeth much strong stomach acid stomach acid hydrochlorid 10 times weaker 10 times weaker acid in stomach than meat eaters than meat eaters intestinal tract intestinal tract 6 intestinal tract only 3 times times body length 6 times body length body length www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 16:22:00 GMT, Jonathan Ball
> wrote: >Jahnu wrote: >> Do you mean to say that there wouldn't be a difference if I smashed >> your head with a shovel and squished a tomato? > >There's a huge difference. I have rights. Do you mean to say that plants should have the same rights as animals? If you think there is no difference between smashing a tomato or smashing a pig's head with a hammer you need to consider treatment. What about insects? Do they also have the same rights as plants and animals in your world? >Go ahead and try your shovel trick on me. Your guts >will be sprayed around about 20 square meters. ooh, how brave we are behind our little key boards  >Answer the question: how much rice do you eat? Why would I want to answer your lame questions? What, are you going to postulate me to death? >> Do you actually want me >> to believe you don't distinguish between which living entity you kill? >> Would it be the same to you to kill a pig as it would to harvest corn? >> I don't believe you. In that case, watch out for the guys in white >> coat.  > >We're talking about animals, you fat ****: the animals >whose death YOU cause by eating whatever it is you eat. How do you figure that a vegetarian causes more animal deaths than a meat eater, O wise one? > You cause the wanton death of animals. But compared to the slaughter house culture, you are a product of, it's peanuts. Nothing causes as much wanton death of animals as the coca cola and slaughter house culture of the West, what are you talking about? All that meat must have dulled your brain. >How much rice do you eat? Answer the question, now. Hey, careful, you are gonna pop a circuit any time now. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:45:05 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message >> Do you mean to say that there wouldn't be a difference if I smashed >> your head with a shovel and squished a tomato? Do you actually want me >> to believe you don't distinguish between which living entity you kill? >> Would it be the same to you to kill a pig as it would to harvest corn? >> I don't believe you. In that case, watch out for the guys in white >> coat. >======================== >You really have no clue do you? I cite from the introduction to 'The Hare Krishna Book of Vegetarian Cooking.' "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 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 13:43:47 -0000, "Benfez"
> wrote: > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message >> It doesn't matter how much noise you meat heads make, the facts are >> still there and they are still true, and society will be punished by >> nature if it doesn't correct its ways. In fact it already IS being >> punished. >> >> >Facts are most farm animals enjoy a good quality of life >> >> In the Disney world you live in, maybe.. not in the real world, buddy. > >Not so, I am a UK farmer, I travel extensively including study tours to US, >Canada and all over Europe. You should try it, perhaps then you might see >that what you think to be true is in fact what you've been brainwashed to >think. 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 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 09:57:11 -0500, Elmo > wrote:
>Not to change the subject, but just curious. Does ISKCON still have that >farm in Juniata County, PA where they keep the bull calves around feeding >them corn silage until they die? I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it by watching TV. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Again, do not force your religion on me. No one is forcing Coca cola or
Mickey Ds on you, you just feel oppressed by it. Fair enough feel oppressed if that makes you happy, but telling me what some mythical characters from the biggest book of cons the world has ever seen (the Bible) were supposed to have done isn't going to impress. "Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:11:07 -0500, "rick etter" > > wrote: > > > > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message > > >Now, go have that nice blood-drenched dinner, killer. > > You are one severely deluded puppy. > > > > The Trappist monks of the Catholic Church practiced > vegetarianism from the founding of their Order until the Second > Vatican Council in the late 1960s. According to the Trappist > rules, as formulated by Armand Jean de Rance (1626-1700), "in > the dining hall nothing is layed out except: pulse, roots, > cabbages, or milk, but never any fish... the use of simple and > rough food has its origin with the holy apostles (James, Peter, > Matthew)." > > Many Christian saints were vegetarian out of compassion > for other living creatures. St. Richard of Wyche, a vegetarian, > was moved by the sight of animals taken to slaughter. "Poor > innocent little creatures," he observed. "If you were reasoning > beings and could speak, you would curse us. For we are the cause > of your death, and what have you done to deserve it?" > > Similarly, St. Filipo Neri (born 1515), spent his entire > life protecting and rescuing other living creatures. He lived as > an ascetic. He sold his books and gave the money to the poor. He > worked without pay in the city hospital, tending to the sick and > the poor. He gave whatever he possessed to others. St. Filipo > loved the animals and could not bear to see them suffer. He took > the mice caught in traps away from people's homes and set them > free in the fields and stables. A vegetarian, he could not > endure walking past a butcher shop. On one occasion, he exclaimed, > "If everyone were like me, no one would kill animals!" > > Indeed, some of the most distinguished figures in the > history of Christianity have been vegetarian, or at least sympathetic > to animal rights: Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, St. > Jerome, St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil, St. Andrew, Sir Thomas More, > Quaker pacifists, St. Columban, John Wesley, Sylvester Graham, > William Paley, Ellen White, Mary Baker Eddy, Cardinal John H. Newman, > Reverend Basil Wrighton, Dr. Albert Schweitzer, etc.. > > C.S. Lewis wrote against vivisection (animal experimentation) > in the 1940s, in an essay entitled, "On Abolition." Frances Arnetta, > a vegetarian, founded Christians Helping Animals and People (CHAP), > and advocates vegetarianism in a tract entitled, "Vegetarianism: > God's Best for All Concerned." The Reverend Andrew Linzey, an > Anglican clergyman, puts forth a theological case for animal > liberation in "Christianity and the Rights of Animals." (1987) > > > > www.krishna.com > www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:22:18 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: >You contribute to the death and suffering of far more animals than some meat >eaters, and they *all* die far more inhumane death than animals in slaughter >houses. How'd you arrive at that fine piece of deductive reasoning, O wise one? ;D >Too bad your religion won't allow the truth to be told, eh hypocrite? Do you mean to say that you think Disney and NASA tells you the truth and nothing but the truth? www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 16:23:31 GMT, Jonathan Ball
> wrote: >Jahnu wrote: >>>>Keeping animals for slaughter is grossly sinful. >>> >>>No, it isn't. >> >> >> Yes, it is very, very sinful > >Only in your damaged, hate-filled imagination. >Sensible people realize it isn't sinful. Why do you think that? www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:29:23 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message >> You mean like in automated slaughter houses that kill at the rate of >> 7000 chicken a second the world over all year round? >===================== >No, like the millions and millions of animals that die horrible, inhumane >deaths for nothing more than your cheap, convenient veggies, hypocrite. Here is the new and revised chart, comparing flesh-eaters to plant eaters, as it appeared in Peter Cox's book, Why You Don't Need Meat, from 1994. It is highly recommendable reading for those who care about what they eat, and who care about the planet and its other inhabitants. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- VEGETARIAN FLESH-EATER HUMAN Hands / hoofs Claws as append- Hands as as appendages ages appendages Teeth flat Teeth sharp Teeth flat Alkaline saliva; Acid saliva; no Alkaline saliva; much ptyalin ptyalin enzyme much ptyalin enzyme enzyme Stomach acid 10 Much strong hydro- Stomach acid 10 times weaker chloride acid in times weaker than than meat-eaters stomach meat-eaters Long intestines Short intestines; Long intestines; to digest nutrients rapidly excrete digest nutrients in in plant foods fully putrefying flesh plant foods fully Sweats to cool Pants to cool Sweats to cool body body body Sips water Laps water Sips water Vitamin C obtained Vitamin C manu- Vitamin C obtained solely from diet factured internally solely from diet Exists largely on Consumes flesh Diet depends fruit and nut diet; exclusively on environment Grasping hands No manual dexte- Grasping hands capable of using terity capable of using tools and weapons tools and weapons Inoffensive Putrid Offensiveness of excrement excrement excrement depends on diet Snack feeder Large meals infre- Combines worst of frequently taken both worlds Predominantly Preference for salty Likes both sweet and sweet toothed / fatty food salty / fatty food Likes to savor Bolts down Likes to savor food, food, experiment food experiment with variety, with variety, com- combine flavors bine flavors Large brains, able Small brains, less Large brains, able to rationalize capable of adaptive to rationalize behavior www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 08:30:42 -0600, "Russ Thompson" >
wrote: >*** I realize that there is no such thing as "karma". How did you arrive at that realization? What's your explanation that people suffer or enjoy differently? www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
snip
I presume you've run out of arguments now, so you just reprint some irrellavent article. Really, try and find out about how animals are kept, especially in the UK where welfare standards are generally accepted as being the highest on the planet. It may help you to understand that a short but high quality life is far superior to no life at all. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals. (more logic of the larder) Attn. Jonathan Ball
"Benfez" > wrote in message ... > snip > It may help you to understand that a short but high > quality life is far superior to no life at all. > Thanks for that, Benfez. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Jahnu wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 09:57:11 -0500, Elmo > wrote: > > >>Not to change the subject, but just curious. Does ISKCON still have that >>farm in Juniata County, PA where they keep the bull calves around feeding >>them corn silage until they die? > > > I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are > throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are > talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it > by watching TV. Well unless I was hallucinating when I visited it multiple times, it was there - just up the road from a tiny little town called Academia. The last time I was there was around 1989 but the farm had been there for a number of years before that. The reason I asked the question is that it was an interesting experiment in running a dairy farm while following ISKCON practices but not one I thought would last due to economic factors. It's a curious thing about cows -- they won't give milk unless they have produced a calf. Roughly half the calves are incapable of ever producing milk by virtue of having the wrong plumbing. Most commercial farms market the calves as "bob veal" (they get slaughtered almost immediately instead of being fed a low-iron liquid diet to produce "fancy veal") or to farmers who specialize in growing young calves until they can be sold as "dairy beef". Since ISKCON couldn't participate in that process, they kept all the bull calves on the farm. Most were castrated to make them more manageable. Of those a few were grown out into oxen and used to pull carts around the farm. The remainder were penned up in conditions worse than any commercial feedlot I have ever seen and fed a protein deficient diet (almost all corn silage with no added protein source and no additional vitamin-mineral supplementation) until they died of disease or other "natural" causes and could be picked up by the renderer and converted into "meat meal", "bone meal", etc. and used in dog food, chicken feed, and (until recently) cattle feed. Most renderers pay nothing and some actually charge for removing dead animals from the farm so keeping that many non-productive animals around isn't something most farmers can afford to do. This particular farm was getting a subsidy from the ISKCON organization or it couldn't have survived. And since this was about the time that ISKCON in the USA was taking heat for some alleged improprieties amongst the higher ups in their organization, I doubt that they could continue to provide the subsidy. Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? > > > > www.krishna.com > www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Benfez wrote:
> snip > > I presume you've run out of arguments now, so you just reprint some > irrellavent article. > > Really, try and find out about how animals are kept, especially in the UK > where welfare standards are generally accepted as being the highest on the > planet. It may help you to understand that a short but high quality life is > far superior to no life at all. No, it isn't, and you are a moron for suggesting it. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message link.net... > Benfez wrote: > > > snip > > > > I presume you've run out of arguments now, so you just reprint some > > irrellavent article. > > > > Really, try and find out about how animals are kept, especially in the UK > > where welfare standards are generally accepted as being the highest on the > > planet. It may help you to understand that a short but high quality life is > > far superior to no life at all. > > No, it isn't, and you are a moron for suggesting it. That isn't a counter argument. Explain to me how it is better to never exist than to exist happily for a period of time. > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Benfez wrote:
> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message > link.net... > >>Benfez wrote: >> >> >>>snip >>> >>>I presume you've run out of arguments now, so you just reprint some >>>irrellavent article. >>> >>>Really, try and find out about how animals are kept, especially in the > > UK > >>>where welfare standards are generally accepted as being the highest on > > the > >>>planet. It may help you to understand that a short but high quality > > life is > >>>far superior to no life at all. >> >>No, it isn't, and you are a moron for suggesting it. > > > That isn't a counter argument. It is. Your claim that "it" is "better" for an animal to exist rather than never come into existence is false. > Explain to me how it is better to never exist > than to exist happily for a period of time. Explain to me in what way it is "better" for an animal to come into existence. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 08:46:07 -0000, "Benfez"
> wrote: >Again, do not force your religion on me. I'm not forcing anything on you. How can I force you? I'm just arguing against the slaughter house culture. Are you saying that I don't have the right to speak up against severe crimes against mother nature, as I perceive them? We are arguing on usenet. You are free to go away any time. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:49:32 -0000, "Benfez"
> wrote: >snip > >I presume you've run out of arguments now, so you just reprint some >irrellavent article. No I am just presenting the facts over and over again, until you offer at better explanation, or refute them with your own scientific data. So far you have just denied the scientific facts I have laid out. That's like denying 2+2=4 >Really, try and find out about how animals are kept, especially in the UK >where welfare standards are generally accepted as being the highest on the >planet. It may help you to understand that a short but high quality life is >far superior to no life at all. And then you woke up.. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:09:23 -0500, Elmo > wrote:
>Jahnu wrote: >> I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are >> throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >> talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it >> by watching TV. <snip> >Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? Yep. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals. (more logic of the larder) Attn. Jonathan Ball
"ipse dixit" > wrote in message
... > > "Benfez" > wrote in message ... > > snip > > It may help you to understand that a short but high > > quality life is far superior to no life at all. > > > Thanks for that, Benfez. For what? Your claim was that "most meatarians" subscribe to this notion, that's now two, out of billions. You're a little short of supporting your claim.. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Jahnu wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:09:23 -0500, Elmo > wrote: > > >>Jahnu wrote: > > >>>I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are >>>throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >>>talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it >>>by watching TV. > > > <snip> > >>Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? > > > Yep. Well since you snipped the truth it's more likely that you can't handle anything that challenges your neat little package. Plonk. > > > www.krishna.com > www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Elmo wrote:
> Jahnu wrote: > >> On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 09:57:11 -0500, Elmo > wrote: >> >> >>> Not to change the subject, but just curious. Does ISKCON still have >>> that farm in Juniata County, PA where they keep the bull calves >>> around feeding them corn silage until they die? >> >> >> >> I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are >> throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >> talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it >> by watching TV. > > > Well unless I was hallucinating when I visited it multiple times, it was > there - just up the road from a tiny little town called Academia. The > last time I was there was around 1989 but the farm had been there for a > number of years before that. The reason I asked the question is that it > was an interesting experiment in running a dairy farm while following > ISKCON practices but not one I thought would last due to economic factors. There was a farm. "Jahnu" - wonder what his real name is? - ought to know about it. ISKCON in the News Articles from the Cult Observer 1984-1999 1986 January/February Krishna Adopt-a-Cow Program (p. 12) In an appeal modeled after charities that help impoverished children, a central Pennsylvania dairy farm run by the Hare Krishnas is developing a program of cow care that is expected to attract funds from Hindus, vegetarians, and animal lovers. The program is called Adopt-a-Cow. Contributions are tax-deductible and credit cards are accepted. The program has three options, as described in ads in newspapers for ethnic Indians and in solicitation letters sent to 15,000 Hindus across the country. The $30-a-month package buys an 8-by-10 color photo of the cow, sweets made from its milk, newsletters on its birthday and on other occasions such as pregnancy, and a weekend "vacation" at the Juniata County cow farm. From The Denver Post Dec. 15, 1985 http://www.cultsandsociety.com/csiss...ws_CO_1986.htm - or - http://tinyurl.com/362y4 That's a nearly 20 year old reference, but the age doesn't matter: it supports the claim that the wacky Hare Krishnas run or ran a dairy farm. > > It's a curious thing about cows -- they won't give milk unless they have > produced a calf. Roughly half the calves are incapable of ever > producing milk by virtue of having the wrong plumbing. Most commercial > farms market the calves as "bob veal" (they get slaughtered almost > immediately instead of being fed a low-iron liquid diet to produce > "fancy veal") or to farmers who specialize in growing young calves until > they can be sold as "dairy beef". Since ISKCON couldn't participate in > that process, they kept all the bull calves on the farm. Most were > castrated to make them more manageable. Of those a few were grown out > into oxen and used to pull carts around the farm. The remainder were > penned up in conditions worse than any commercial feedlot I have ever > seen and fed a protein deficient diet (almost all corn silage with no > added protein source and no additional vitamin-mineral supplementation) > until they died of disease or other "natural" causes and could be picked > up by the renderer and converted into "meat meal", "bone meal", etc. > and used in dog food, chicken feed, and (until recently) cattle feed. > Most renderers pay nothing and some actually charge for removing dead > animals from the farm so keeping that many non-productive animals around > isn't something most farmers can afford to do. This particular farm was > getting a subsidy from the ISKCON organization or it couldn't have > survived. And since this was about the time that ISKCON in the USA was > taking heat for some alleged improprieties amongst the higher ups in > their organization, I doubt that they could continue to provide the > subsidy. > > Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? > > >> >> >> >> www.krishna.com >> www.iskcon.org > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Some ****wit who abandoned his real name and now goes
by "Jahnu" wrote: > On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:09:23 -0500, Elmo > wrote: > > >>Jahnu wrote: > > >>>I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are >>>throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >>>talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it >>>by watching TV. > > > <snip> > >>Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? > > > Yep. You're wrong. He *does* know. Tell us about the wacky Hare Krishna cow farm, Goofball-aka-"Jahnu". "Jahnu"?? Is that the best you could come up with? What's your real name? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Elmo wrote:
> Jahnu wrote: > >> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:09:23 -0500, Elmo > wrote: >> >> >>> Jahnu wrote: >> >> >> >>>> I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are >>>> throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >>>> talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it >>>> by watching TV. >> >> >> >> <snip> >> >>> Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? >> >> >> >> Yep. > > > Well since you snipped the truth it's more likely that you can't handle > anything that challenges your neat little package. Plonk. No; don't go! This is about to get good. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Some ****wit who abandoned his real name and now goes
by "Jahnu" wrote: > On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:09:23 -0500, Elmo > wrote: > > >>Jahnu wrote: > > >>>I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are >>>throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >>>talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it >>>by watching TV. > > > <snip> > >>Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? > > > Yep. Allow me to help. I only want to help; it's my whole life. In the late 70's to the late 80's Gita Nagari was a thriving farm; 25 acres of grain (wheat and oats), 75 acres of corn for the cows and 50 acres of hay fields. There was a large garden planted each year, usually about 4 acres of vegetables and 3 acres of potatoes. From the Brown Swiss cows there was so much milk, that literally we didn't know how to use it all until one devotee started to make hard cheese. At the peak of that period there were 27 cows milking. We made all of our own butter, yogurt, curd, and had enough milk for the 125 devotees to drink and then some to sell. http://www.iscowp.org/All%20About%20Us.htm Care to tell us any more, JoeBob (or whatever-the-**** your real name is)? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Jonathan Ball wrote:
> Elmo wrote: > >> Jahnu wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:09:23 -0500, Elmo > wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Jahnu wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>> I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are >>>>> throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >>>>> talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it >>>>> by watching TV. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> <snip> >>> >>>> Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Yep. >> >> >> >> Well since you snipped the truth it's more likely that you can't >> handle anything that challenges your neat little package. Plonk. > > > No; don't go! This is about to get good. > My experience with the ISKCON crowd is not limited to their farm. For a number of years I had a crowd of them as neighbors -- their temple/dormitory or whatever they called it was two streets away from me in the old YMCA building. Both crowds exhibited the same monomaniacal ability to dismiss unpleasant facts as mere dharma/illusion that "Jahnu" has just done. This strongly implies -- to near certainty -- that it would be a huge waste of time. Quite possibly an entertaining one, but ultimately futile. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Elmo wrote:
> Jonathan Ball wrote: > >> Elmo wrote: >> >>> Jahnu wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:09:23 -0500, Elmo > wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Jahnu wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are >>>>>> throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >>>>>> talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it >>>>>> by watching TV. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> <snip> >>>> >>>>> Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Yep. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Well since you snipped the truth it's more likely that you can't >>> handle anything that challenges your neat little package. Plonk. >> >> >> >> No; don't go! This is about to get good. >> > My experience with the ISKCON crowd is not limited to their farm. For a > number of years I had a crowd of them as neighbors -- their > temple/dormitory or whatever they called it was two streets away from me > in the old YMCA building. Both crowds exhibited the same monomaniacal > ability to dismiss unpleasant facts as mere dharma/illusion that "Jahnu" > has just done. This strongly implies -- to near certainty -- that it > would be a huge waste of time. Quite possibly an entertaining one, but > ultimately futile. Well, with few exceptions, usenet is only about entertainment anyway. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Jonathan Ball wrote:
> Elmo wrote: > >> Jonathan Ball wrote: >> >>> Elmo wrote: >>> >>>> Jahnu wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:09:23 -0500, Elmo > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Jahnu wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are >>>>>>> throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >>>>>>> talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you learned it >>>>>>> by watching TV. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> <snip> >>>>> >>>>>> Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yep. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Well since you snipped the truth it's more likely that you can't >>>> handle anything that challenges your neat little package. Plonk. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> No; don't go! This is about to get good. >>> >> My experience with the ISKCON crowd is not limited to their farm. For >> a number of years I had a crowd of them as neighbors -- their >> temple/dormitory or whatever they called it was two streets away from >> me in the old YMCA building. Both crowds exhibited the same >> monomaniacal ability to dismiss unpleasant facts as mere >> dharma/illusion that "Jahnu" has just done. This strongly implies -- >> to near certainty -- that it would be a huge waste of time. Quite >> possibly an entertaining one, but ultimately futile. > > > Well, with few exceptions, usenet is only about entertainment anyway. > For unmoderated groups it often degenerates into that. More's the pity as this group (misc.rural) can actually provide some valid information when the thread doesn't get hijacked and cross-posted to all points of the intellectual compass. Moderated groups and groups with a highly technical content are able to squelch the noise with more success. BTW -- I had quite forgotten about adopt-a-cow. Some of the other info you posted appears to have been passed through the rose-color filter. My recollection is that the farm was not able to pass inspection to ship Class A fluid milk and even the nearby cheese making plants wouldn't take their milk which was odd because the high protein content of Brown Swiss milk is usually desireable to cheesemakers. At any rate they were using the only other option (short of dumping the milk) which was to have it made into cheese on a contract basis by a plant that specialized in doing that sort of thing. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Elmo wrote:
> Jonathan Ball wrote: > >> Elmo wrote: >> >>> Jonathan Ball wrote: >>> >>>> Elmo wrote: >>>> >>>>> Jahnu wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:09:23 -0500, Elmo > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Jahnu wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you are >>>>>>>> throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >>>>>>>> talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you >>>>>>>> learned it >>>>>>>> by watching TV. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> <snip> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yep. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Well since you snipped the truth it's more likely that you can't >>>>> handle anything that challenges your neat little package. Plonk. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> No; don't go! This is about to get good. >>>> >>> My experience with the ISKCON crowd is not limited to their farm. >>> For a number of years I had a crowd of them as neighbors -- their >>> temple/dormitory or whatever they called it was two streets away from >>> me in the old YMCA building. Both crowds exhibited the same >>> monomaniacal ability to dismiss unpleasant facts as mere >>> dharma/illusion that "Jahnu" has just done. This strongly implies -- >>> to near certainty -- that it would be a huge waste of time. Quite >>> possibly an entertaining one, but ultimately futile. >> >> >> >> Well, with few exceptions, usenet is only about entertainment anyway. >> > For unmoderated groups it often degenerates into that. More's the pity > as this group (misc.rural) can actually provide some valid information > when the thread doesn't get hijacked and cross-posted to all points of > the intellectual compass. Moderated groups and groups with a highly > technical content are able to squelch the noise with more success. > > BTW -- I had quite forgotten about adopt-a-cow. Some of the other info > you posted appears to have been passed through the rose-color filter. Perhaps, but not mine. Actually, one of the references was from some kind of "cult-watch" page, so I doubt it was all that rosy. Anyway, I only posted the material to refute JoeBob's (wonder what "Jahnu's" real name is?) implied claim that the farm never existed. > My recollection is that the farm was not able to pass inspection to ship > Class A fluid milk and even the nearby cheese making plants wouldn't > take their milk which was odd because the high protein content of Brown > Swiss milk is usually desireable to cheesemakers. At any rate they were > using the only other option (short of dumping the milk) which was to > have it made into cheese on a contract basis by a plant that specialized > in doing that sort of thing. > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
Jonathan Ball wrote:
> Elmo wrote: > >> Jonathan Ball wrote: >> >>> Elmo wrote: >>> >>>> Jonathan Ball wrote: >>>> >>>>> Elmo wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Jahnu wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:09:23 -0500, Elmo > >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jahnu wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't think we ever had one. I think it is just some dirt you >>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>> throwing in to obscure the fact that you have no clue what you are >>>>>>>>> talking about. Common tactic among politicians. I bet you >>>>>>>>> learned it >>>>>>>>> by watching TV. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Still think I don't know what I'm talking about? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yep. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Well since you snipped the truth it's more likely that you can't >>>>>> handle anything that challenges your neat little package. Plonk. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No; don't go! This is about to get good. >>>>> >>>> My experience with the ISKCON crowd is not limited to their farm. >>>> For a number of years I had a crowd of them as neighbors -- their >>>> temple/dormitory or whatever they called it was two streets away >>>> from me in the old YMCA building. Both crowds exhibited the same >>>> monomaniacal ability to dismiss unpleasant facts as mere >>>> dharma/illusion that "Jahnu" has just done. This strongly implies >>>> -- to near certainty -- that it would be a huge waste of time. >>>> Quite possibly an entertaining one, but ultimately futile. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Well, with few exceptions, usenet is only about entertainment anyway. >>> >> For unmoderated groups it often degenerates into that. More's the >> pity as this group (misc.rural) can actually provide some valid >> information when the thread doesn't get hijacked and cross-posted to >> all points of the intellectual compass. Moderated groups and groups >> with a highly technical content are able to squelch the noise with >> more success. >> >> BTW -- I had quite forgotten about adopt-a-cow. Some of the other >> info you posted appears to have been passed through the rose-color >> filter. > > > Perhaps, but not mine. Actually, one of the references was from some > kind of "cult-watch" page, so I doubt it was all that rosy. Anyway, I > only posted the material to refute JoeBob's (wonder what "Jahnu's" real > name is?) implied claim that the farm never existed. You mean that wasn't you writing in the first person who said: "From the Brown Swiss cows there was so much milk, that literally we didn't know how to use it all until one devotee started to make hard cheese. At the peak of that period there were 27 cows milking. We made all of our own butter, yogurt, curd, and had enough milk for the 125 devotees to drink and then some to sell." ? How could I have been mistaken? <grin> Because that's the very rose-colored line I had in mind. As for the name, IIRC the name is provided to you in exchange for anything of value which you might have had before you became enlightened enough to recognize that those material posessions are holding you back from self-realization. You must let go of all connections to your former life and your name is, of course, the one thing which binds you most closely to that former life so it has to go. > >> My recollection is that the farm was not able to pass inspection to >> ship Class A fluid milk and even the nearby cheese making plants >> wouldn't take their milk which was odd because the high protein >> content of Brown Swiss milk is usually desireable to cheesemakers. At >> any rate they were using the only other option (short of dumping the >> milk) which was to have it made into cheese on a contract basis by a >> plant that specialized in doing that sort of thing. >> > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:11:07 -0500, "rick etter" > > wrote: > > > > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message > > >Now, go have that nice blood-drenched dinner, killer. > > You are one severely deluded puppy. ================== No, you just prefer to have your head buried. Your dishonest snipping noted. Your lack of comment noted even more, hypocrite... > > > > The Trappist monks of the Catholic Church practiced > vegetarianism from the founding of their Order until the Second > Vatican Council in the late 1960s. According to the Trappist > rules, as formulated by Armand Jean de Rance (1626-1700), "in > the dining hall nothing is layed out except: pulse, roots, > cabbages, or milk, but never any fish... the use of simple and > rough food has its origin with the holy apostles (James, Peter, > Matthew)." ================= You ain't them, killer. > > Many Christian saints were vegetarian out of compassion > for other living creatures. St. Richard of Wyche, a vegetarian, > was moved by the sight of animals taken to slaughter. "Poor > innocent little creatures," he observed. "If you were reasoning > beings and could speak, you would curse us. For we are the cause > of your death, and what have you done to deserve it?" ====================== You ain't them, killer. > snip of rest of crap... |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
"Jahnu" > wrote in message ... > On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:45:05 -0500, "rick etter" > > wrote: > > > > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message > > >> Do you mean to say that there wouldn't be a difference if I smashed > >> your head with a shovel and squished a tomato? Do you actually want me > >> to believe you don't distinguish between which living entity you kill? > >> Would it be the same to you to kill a pig as it would to harvest corn? > >> I don't believe you. In that case, watch out for the guys in white > >> coat. > >======================== > >You really have no clue do you? > > > I cite from the introduction to 'The Hare Krishna Book > of Vegetarian Cooking.' ================ What's the maytter killer, can't answer the question? > > "Can a vegetarian diet improve or restore health? Can it prevent > certain diseases? ===================== No. end case... snippage of usual ignorance posing as science Here are some sites, with info on specific areas and pesticides. Animals die. http://www.abcbirds.org/pesticides/pesticideindex.htm http://www.pmac.net/summer-rivers.html http://www.pmac.net/fishkill.htm http://www.pmac.net/summer-rivers.html http://www.pmac.net/bird_fish_CA.html http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ncs/news...00/nitrate.htm http://www.abcbirds.org/pesticides/P...carbofuran.htm http://www.nwf.org/internationalwildlife/hawk.html http://www.pan-uk.org/pestnews/Pn36/pn36p3.htm http://www.wwfcanada.org/satellite/p...feFactSheet.pd f http://www.panna.org/panna/resources...Cotton.dv.html http://www.sustainablecotton.org/TOUR/ http://www.wildlifetrustofindia.org/...ele_poison.htm http://species.fws.gov/bio_rhin.html http://www.forages.css.orst.edu/Topi...rate/Mice.html http://eesc.orst.edu/agcomwebfile/news/food/vegan.html http://www.hornedlizards.org/hornedlizards/help.html http://insects.tamu.edu/extension/bulletins/b-5093.html http://www.orst.edu/dept/ncs/newsarc...00/nitrate.htm http://www.orst.edu/instruct/fw251/n...riculture.html http://www.pan-uk.org/pestnews/Pn35/pn35p6.htm http://www.clearwater.org/news/powerplants.html http://www.towerkill.com/index.html http://www.repp.org/repp_pubs/articl.../04impacts.htm Since your non-animal clothing isn't cruelty-free either, here's a couple to cover some problems with cotton. http://www.panna.org/panna/resources...Cotton.dv.html http://www.sustainablecotton.org/TOUR/ To give you an idea of the sheer number of animals in a field, here's some sites about *just* mice and voles. Note that there can be 100s to 1000s in each acre, not the whole field. http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache...state.edu/pubs /natres/06507.pdf+%22voles+per+acre%22+field&hl=en&ie=UTF8 http://extension.usu.edu/publica/natrpubs/voles.pdf http://extension.ag.uidaho.edu/district4/MG/voles.html http://www.forages.css.orst.edu/Topi...rate/Mice.html To cover your selfish pleasure of using usenet, here's are a couple dealing with power and communications. http://www.clearwater.org/news/powerplants.html http://www.towerkill.com/index.html |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:09:31 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message >> You are one severely deluded puppy. >================== >No, you just prefer to have your head buried. 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 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:35:44 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message >> Who said I believed that? >===================== >You keep ignoring it. Same thing. Ignoring what? >Plus, you have dishonestly snipped out the references without comment, as >usual.. I only snip the superfluous, mindless drivel, which means I have to snip most of your posts away: 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 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:37:14 -0500, "rick etter"
> wrote: > >"Jahnu" > wrote in message >> >> Do you mean to say that there wouldn't be a difference if I smashed >> >> your head with a shovel and squished a tomato? Do you actually want me >> >> to believe you don't distinguish between which living entity you kill? >> >> Would it be the same to you to kill a pig as it would to harvest corn? >> >> I don't believe you. In that case, watch out for the guys in white >> >> coat. >> I cite from the introduction to 'The Hare Krishna Book >> of Vegetarian Cooking.' >================ >What's the maytter killer, can't answer the question? What question? "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 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:15:19 -0000, "Benfez"
> wrote: >That isn't a counter argument. Explain to me how it is better to never exist >than to exist happily for a period of time. First explain where you get the idea that animals are happily walking to the slaughter house. www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:26:10 -0500, Elmo > wrote:
>Jahnu wrote: >> Yep. > >Well since you snipped the truth it's more likely that you can't handle >anything that challenges your neat little package. Plonk. You mean, in the same way you can't handle the truth of this: 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 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:04:03 GMT, Jonathan Ball
> wrote: >Elmo wrote: >> Well since you snipped the truth it's more likely that you can't handle >> anything that challenges your neat little package. Plonk. > >No; don't go! This is about to get good. It's already good. Nothing like a bunch of retarded meat heads getting their asses kicked. I just love it here. You guys really make me feel intellectually superior www.krishna.com www.iskcon.org |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No need for farm animals.
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:15:56 -0500, Elmo > wrote:
>My experience with the ISKCON crowd is not limited to their farm. For a >number of years I had a crowd of them as neighbors -- their >temple/dormitory or whatever they called it was two streets away from me >in the old YMCA building. Both crowds exhibited the same monomaniacal >ability to dismiss unpleasant facts as mere dharma/illusion that "Jahnu" >has just done. You mean, unpleasant facts like these ones :? 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 |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Lab-Grown Meat May Save a Lot More than Farm Animals’ Lives | General Cooking | |||
| 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. | General Cooking | |||
| "Consideration for the lives of farm animals" - meaningless tripe | Vegan | |||
| Non-existent - but NOT imaginary - farm animals | Vegan | |||
| A day on the farm | General Cooking | |||
Linear Mode
