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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 30-12-2004, 03:30 AM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

J.C. Scott wrote:
Nevermind that the meat industry is a multibillion dollar
a year industry,


So is the "vegetable industry." So is the "fruit industry." So is the
"soy industry." So is the "grain industry." So is the "water
industry." What kind of industry are you employed? Guess what. It's probably a
multibillion dollar a year industry. You sloppy dunce.


"Beef cattle rank as the most valuable product of the nation's farms,
accounting for almost one-fourth of total annual farm receipts."

http://www.english.agava.ru/country/usa-econ.htm

Now, if those profits were to get infringed upon by, say,


Just say ANYthing, because you don't want to deal with reality. The
question really is, What does science show? It doesn't show what you
claim. You're relying on studies which show that heavy consumption is
bad and moderate consumption is okay; they don't say anything about zero
consumption being even better than moderation, but that's what you
parrot from blowhard alternative "doctors'" websites.

The funniest part of all is you're basing this on an irrational
objection to profit-making. Other agricultural products are also
profitable, and far more profitable than beef production. Growers and
marketers of other products hire lobbyists, PR people, and scientists to
skew studies; they also have been known to cover up possible risky
things about their own products. There's a lot of information about soy
that shows it may not be the safest or healthiest alternative to meat;
it could cause certain forms of cancer to metastasize and spread faster,
and the phytoestrogens in soy delay or prevent sexual maturation in male
rats in lab studies. Got tits?

You initially said you liked meat. Have you considered the leaner
options available to you, some of which DON'T add to the profitability
of multinational beef producers? What do you have against wild game, for
example? What about grass-fed (NOT grain-finished) beef? What about
catching your own fish?

  #17 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 03-01-2005, 05:24 AM
J.C. Scott
 
Posts: n/a
Default

usual suspect wrote:
J.C. Scott wrote:
Jay Santos wrote:

At Wikipedia:

Those who avoid animal products for reasons of
health (eg, due to allergies, or to avoid
cholesterol), rather than compassion sometimes
describe themselves as "dietary vegans". However,
popular vegan author Joanne Stepaniak argues that
this term is inappropriate because veganism is by
definition about helping animals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegan



I don't eat any animal products at all, and it's strictly for

health
reasons. In my own case, it has nothing to do with compassion for
animals. In fact, I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of

such
consumption, I abstain.


What "ill effects"?


http://www.drgreger.org/talks.html


A person could label me vegetarian but that's
too lax a term, in my opinion, because plenty of vegetarians

continue
to eat eggs and cheese, which I don't. My diet is extremely rigid.


So is your sense of semantics. Why do you insist on using *any*

labels
if animal rights isn't a personal concern?


The dictionary definition of 'vegetarianism' or 'vegan' fails to
mention animal rights, therefore your question is irrelevant.

If
the debate is strictly over whether the term "dietary vegan" is

valid,
well, it's just trivial semantics, as far as I'm concerned anyway.


Then why do you consider "vegetarian" too lax a description of your

diet?

.... because I'm open to debate it just for the sake of discussion, but
when it's all said and done it's really a nonevent, in my opinion.

  #18 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 03-01-2005, 06:12 AM
rick etter
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"J.C. Scott" wrote in message
oups.com...
usual suspect wrote:
J.C. Scott wrote:
Jay Santos wrote:

At Wikipedia:

Those who avoid animal products for reasons of
health (eg, due to allergies, or to avoid
cholesterol), rather than compassion sometimes
describe themselves as "dietary vegans". However,
popular vegan author Joanne Stepaniak argues that
this term is inappropriate because veganism is by
definition about helping animals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegan


I don't eat any animal products at all, and it's strictly for

health
reasons. In my own case, it has nothing to do with compassion for
animals. In fact, I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of

such
consumption, I abstain.


What "ill effects"?


http://www.drgreger.org/talks.html

=======================
All I saw was a scam artist looking for your money. What percentage do you
get for directing people to a site full of propaganda to scare the rubes
into "donating" all their cash?




A person could label me vegetarian but that's
too lax a term, in my opinion, because plenty of vegetarians

continue
to eat eggs and cheese, which I don't. My diet is extremely rigid.


So is your sense of semantics. Why do you insist on using *any*

labels
if animal rights isn't a personal concern?


The dictionary definition of 'vegetarianism' or 'vegan' fails to
mention animal rights, therefore your question is irrelevant.

===============
I suggest you get a better dictionary then fool. Look up the real meaning
of the term as it was intended by the *GUY* that coined it, idiot. You can
pretend now that it means anything you want, because you're a) too lazy to
reesly be vegan, and b) too stupid to know how to be vegan.
Hint, look up Donald Watson, killer.





If
the debate is strictly over whether the term "dietary vegan" is

valid,
well, it's just trivial semantics, as far as I'm concerned anyway.


Then why do you consider "vegetarian" too lax a description of your

diet?

... because I'm open to debate it just for the sake of discussion, but
when it's all said and done it's really a nonevent, in my opinion.

========================
Except all the animals that die for your veggies. They might think that an
event happened.




  #19 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 05-01-2005, 07:59 PM
Laurie
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"usual suspect" wrote in message
...
I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.


What "ill effects"?

The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is well known in the
scientific/medical literature, if willfully not by the anti-veg*n hate
mongers. Pick the "degenerative disease" of your choice at:
www.ecologos.org/ttdd.html

Laurie




  #20 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 05-01-2005, 10:26 PM
Abner Hale
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Lying Larry, failed loser, wrote:
"usual suspect" wrote in message
...
I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of

such
consumption, I abstain.


What "ill effects"?

The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is well known in

the
scientific/medical literature, if willfully not by the anti-veg*n

hate
mongers. Pick the "degenerative disease" of your choice at:
www.ecologos.org/ttdd.html

Laurie



Lying Larry, that's NOT a credible site. It's a pile of hysterics put
together by charlatans, by lying snake oil salesmen like YOU, loser.
People like YOU, who have ZERO scientific qualifications to say
ANYTHING about diet.



  #21 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 05-01-2005, 11:06 PM
rick etter
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Laurie" wrote in message
...

"usual suspect" wrote in message
...
I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.


What "ill effects"?

The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is well known in the
scientific/medical literature, if willfully not by the anti-veg*n hate
mongers. Pick the "degenerative disease" of your choice at:
www.ecologos.org/ttdd.html
=======================

ROTFLMAO You decry anti-vegan sites and then as "proof" for your own
ignorance you put forth anti-meat sites.

You really are just too much of a hoot, killer!



Laurie






  #22 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 06-01-2005, 01:00 AM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Larry wrote:
"usual suspect" wrote in message
...

I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.


What "ill effects"?


The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is


Effects *ARE*, you fruity oaf.

well known in the
scientific/medical literature,


Larry, does the literature you've selectively chosen for your dumb
website focus on generalized consumption of meat, overconsumption of
meat, or does it take into account moderate consumption of recommended
portion sizes? You're not much of a scientist if you focus only on
studies that demonstrate what overconsumption of meat can do, because I
can find studies of overconsumption of numerous other foods, including
foods high in sugar.

Compare apples to apples: find some studies which include moderate
intake of lean meats -- red, white, fish, doesn't matter so long as
they're lean, although consumption of fish and wild game has shown
reduced incidence of heart disease, lower LDL and triglyceride levels,
etc. -- and compare those to some kind of "vegan" control if you want.
You'll find no significant health differences among those who consume
*healthy* diets, whether they contain meat or not. Meat isn't the evil
you claim it to be, overconsumption is. And meat eaters aren't alone
when it comes to risks of overconsumption: see Derek Nash -- an utterly
undisciplined 250 pound "vegan."

http://www.cnn.com/FOOD/news/9906/28/red.meat.study/
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/...ies/s60363.htm
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...?oneclick=true

if willfully not by the anti-veg*n hate
mongers.


You conveniently left out the vegan misanthropes and hate mongers, but
why should you single yourself out.
  #23 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 06-01-2005, 01:00 AM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Larry wrote:
"usual suspect" wrote in message
...

I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.


What "ill effects"?


The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is


Effects *ARE*, you fruity oaf.

well known in the
scientific/medical literature,


Larry, does the literature you've selectively chosen for your dumb
website focus on generalized consumption of meat, overconsumption of
meat, or does it take into account moderate consumption of recommended
portion sizes? You're not much of a scientist if you focus only on
studies that demonstrate what overconsumption of meat can do, because I
can find studies of overconsumption of numerous other foods, including
foods high in sugar.

Compare apples to apples: find some studies which include moderate
intake of lean meats -- red, white, fish, doesn't matter so long as
they're lean, although consumption of fish and wild game has shown
reduced incidence of heart disease, lower LDL and triglyceride levels,
etc. -- and compare those to some kind of "vegan" control if you want.
You'll find no significant health differences among those who consume
*healthy* diets, whether they contain meat or not. Meat isn't the evil
you claim it to be, overconsumption is. And meat eaters aren't alone
when it comes to risks of overconsumption: see Derek Nash -- an utterly
undisciplined 250 pound "vegan."

http://www.cnn.com/FOOD/news/9906/28/red.meat.study/
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/...ies/s60363.htm
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...?oneclick=true

if willfully not by the anti-veg*n hate
mongers.


You conveniently left out the vegan misanthropes and hate mongers, but
why should you single yourself out.
  #24 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-01-2005, 07:54 AM
Rudy Canoza
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Larry Fruity wrote:

"usual suspect" wrote in message
...

I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.


What "ill effects"?


The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is well known


No, it isn't. Once again, you are confusing mere
polemical assertion with fact.
  #25 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-01-2005, 07:54 AM
Rudy Canoza
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Larry Fruity wrote:

"usual suspect" wrote in message
...

I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.


What "ill effects"?


The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is well known


No, it isn't. Once again, you are confusing mere
polemical assertion with fact.


  #26 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-01-2005, 08:50 AM
John Coleman
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Rudy Canoza" wrote in message
ink.net...
Larry Fruity wrote:

"usual suspect" wrote in message
...

I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.

What "ill effects"?


The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is well known


No, it isn't. Once again, you are confusing mere
polemical assertion with fact.


You are out of touch Rudy, the ill effects of consuming animal products are
the outcome of years of epidemiology, clinical research, and other
scientific work. They are therefore well known. Both heart disease and
cancer are major killers that have been associated with eating animal
products.

John


  #27 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-01-2005, 08:50 AM
John Coleman
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Rudy Canoza" wrote in message
ink.net...
Larry Fruity wrote:

"usual suspect" wrote in message
...

I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.

What "ill effects"?


The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is well known


No, it isn't. Once again, you are confusing mere
polemical assertion with fact.


You are out of touch Rudy, the ill effects of consuming animal products are
the outcome of years of epidemiology, clinical research, and other
scientific work. They are therefore well known. Both heart disease and
cancer are major killers that have been associated with eating animal
products.

John


  #28 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-01-2005, 04:01 PM
Rudy Canoza
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Coleman wrote:

"Rudy Canoza" wrote in message
ink.net...

Larry Fruity wrote:


"usual suspect" wrote in message
.. .


I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.

What "ill effects"?

The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is well known


No, it isn't. Once again, you are confusing mere
polemical assertion with fact.



You are out of touch Rudy, the ill effects of consuming animal products are
the outcome of years of epidemiology, clinical research, and other
scientific work.


No, there is no such conclusion that comes out of any
of those fields. Furthermore, YOU have no expertise in
any of the fields. That's why you are so prone to
misreading the conclusions they DO make.
  #29 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-01-2005, 04:01 PM
Rudy Canoza
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Coleman wrote:

"Rudy Canoza" wrote in message
ink.net...

Larry Fruity wrote:


"usual suspect" wrote in message
.. .


I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.

What "ill effects"?

The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is well known


No, it isn't. Once again, you are confusing mere
polemical assertion with fact.



You are out of touch Rudy, the ill effects of consuming animal products are
the outcome of years of epidemiology, clinical research, and other
scientific work.


No, there is no such conclusion that comes out of any
of those fields. Furthermore, YOU have no expertise in
any of the fields. That's why you are so prone to
misreading the conclusions they DO make.
  #30 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-01-2005, 08:06 PM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Coleman wrote:
I love hamburgers and chicken, among many other
types of animal products, but due to the associated ill effects of such
consumption, I abstain.

What "ill effects"?

The "ill effects" of consuming animal products is well known


No, it isn't. Once again, you are confusing mere
polemical assertion with fact.


You are out of touch Rudy,


You were never in touch, Coleman.

the ill effects of consuming animal products are
the outcome of years of epidemiology, clinical research, and other
scientific work.


Your sentence is so shoddy that it appears you're blaming scientific
study for the ill effects of consuming animal products, you sissy.

They are therefore well known.


Logical fallacy of appealing to popular knowledge. To date, studies have
shown that overconsumption of certain animal products, especially fatty
meat, can have deleterious health consequences. But conversely, some
studies have shown consumption particularly of fish and poultry to have
very positive health benefits: reduced incidence of colorectal cancers,
significant improvements in LDL:HDL and triglycerides, etc.

Both heart disease and
cancer are major killers that have been associated with eating animal
products.


Ipse dixit, poor generalization. The latest red meat study which you'll
no doubt put on your pseudoscience website showed a significant
reduction in colorectal cancer rates among those who ate more poultry
and fish. As well, the studies upon which you rely seldom distinguish
between lean meats and fatty meats, reduced-fat dairy products and whole
milk products, etc. IOW, you like to compare apples to oranges and make
wild claims accordingly.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WHY VEGANISM? Dr. Jai Maharaj[_1_] Vegan 72 12-02-2012 11:46 PM
free health coupons and samples from quality health pappu Diabetic 0 02-05-2007 07:17 AM
get frEE health samples from QUALITY HEALTH pappu Diabetic 0 30-04-2007 01:15 PM
free health coupons and samples from quality health pappu Diabetic 0 21-04-2007 01:28 PM
free health coupons and samples from quality health pappu Diabetic 0 18-04-2007 03:16 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:03 AM.

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

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"

 

Copyright © 2017