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
  #31 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-10-2005, 01:27 AM posted to alt.food.vegan
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup

Skanky wrote:
"rick" wrote in message
nk.net...

"C. James Strutz" wrote in message
...

"rick" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"Scented Nectar" wrote in message
...

"rick" wrote in message
arthlink.net...

"Dave" wrote in message
oglegroups.com...

rick wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message
news:[email protected] googlegroups.com...

Some other beans can be poisonous if not cooked
properly but
red kidney
beans contain the highest concentrations of
Phytohaemagglutnin,
which
causes nausea and diarrhoea. Raw soya beans contain a
trypsin
inhibitor
which
prevents proper digestion of your food. If you follow
the
established
guildlines,
cooking from fresh should be perfectly safe.

===============================
LOL I guess you just proved that man is not a herbavore,
thanks....

(a) I don't believe in the "man is naturally a herbivore"
line
of argument and had already said as much.
(b) How have I just proved that man is not a herbivore?

============================
That you can't eat plants without cooking them...

Rick, you should know by now that
beans, grains and some other seeds
can be sprouted and eaten raw. And
of course many fruits and vegetables
and nuts can obviously be eaten raw too.

======================
And, as you are apparently too stupid to understand, there are
many plants that are outright poisonous for people, and many
many more that contain no nutrients for human consumption.
Name a meat that isn't.....

How about if you name a couple of the "many, many plants that
contain no nutrients for human consumption". Make sure they are
not contained in the set that "are outright poisonous for
people". Shouldn't be too difficult if there are so many of
them...


==========================
grass, fool....
and yet a real herbavore, cows, can easily convert that to
edible, tasty, healthy foods for people.



If I remember correctly,


We know that your memory is pretty ****ed up. No doubt it has something
to do with your drug abuse.

the juice of
all members of the grass family is
edible to humans.


That requires extensive processing. Most grasses can't even be juiced
with a standard juicer. And most grasses that are juiced aren't common
meadow grasses, but the sprouts of various edible grains.

  #32 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-10-2005, 02:29 AM posted to alt.food.vegan
rick
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup


"Scented Nectar" wrote in message
news
"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Scented Nectar" wrote in message
...
"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Scented Nectar" wrote in message
...
"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Dave" wrote in message
oups.com...

rick wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
oups.com...
Some other beans can be poisonous if not cooked
properly
but
red kidney
beans contain the highest concentrations of
Phytohaemagglutnin,
which
causes nausea and diarrhoea. Raw soya beans contain
a
trypsin
inhibitor
which
prevents proper digestion of your food. If you
follow
the
established
guildlines,
cooking from fresh should be perfectly safe.
===============================
LOL I guess you just proved that man is not a
herbavore,
thanks....

(a) I don't believe in the "man is naturally a
herbivore"
line
of argument and had already said as much.
(b) How have I just proved that man is not a
herbivore?
============================
That you can't eat plants without cooking them...

Rick, you should know by now that
beans, grains and some other seeds
can be sprouted and eaten raw. And
of course many fruits and vegetables
and nuts can obviously be eaten raw too.
======================
And, as you are apparently too stupid to understand, there
are
many plants that are outright poisonous for people, and
many
many
more that contain no nutrients for human consumption. Name
a
meat that isn't.....

Blowfish.

=======================
Nope. Not all the flesh is poisonous....


It takes training and a license to
prepare it so that it's safe to eat.
===================
Yet the flesh is not poisonous. thanks for proving my point,
killer.



As far as plants go, if you don't
know which ones in our society that are
edible, then I guess you'll never know.
The point is that the edible ones are
indeed edible raw. Do you eat your
meat raw? It sounds like you should be
hanging out in those Paleo-diet groups.
But watch out for raw ground beef. It
can kill you too.


Let's not forget the ground beef's E.coli.
And other lovely gifts from other dead
livestock, like anthrax and salmonella.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/





  #33 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-10-2005, 03:39 AM posted to alt.food.vegan
C. James Strutz
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup


"usual suspect" wrote in message
...
C. James Strutz wrote:
...

Rick, you should know by now that
beans, grains and some other seeds
can be sprouted and eaten raw. And
of course many fruits and vegetables
and nuts can obviously be eaten raw too.

======================
And, as you are apparently too stupid to understand, there are
many plants that are outright poisonous for people, and many many
more that contain no nutrients for human consumption. Name a
meat that isn't.....

Blowfish.

Guess again, dummy. Fugu contains nutrients, and is safe when processed
properly.



"When processed properly" is *very* key here. Not just anybody can
prepare fugu, you have to be specially trained and licensed to do so.


Skanky made a *blanket* statement that fugu is poisonous and/or contains
no nutrients. I specified that it can be safe when properly processed.

To be fair in these comparisions I think you have to consider that many
animals are dangerous to hunt: boars, snakes, bears, large cats, charging
rumnants, some fish, and many now extinct species to name a few.


I think your concern about the danger is overblown.


Maybe today it is but it was a very serious concern before technology gave
us an advantage.

Plants cannot hunt, charge, maul, bite, or tear flesh.


Tearing flesh? My legs beg to differ with you after a little incident with
some briar last weekend.


I mean tearing flesh in the way that animals tear flesh, not little
scratches from briars.

And if your definition of hunting includes using some form of lure to
attract prey, what do you consider these plants to be doing?
http://tinyurl.com/ddu75


We're talking about people, not insects. Carnivorous plants don't eat
people.

Animals can also become toxic if they consume toxic foods or if they
become ill. This is not a problem with plants since they are at the
bottom of the food chain.


Plants grown intentionally or unintentionally in the presence of various
chemicals can be toxic and cause poisoning of humans and other animals.
Crops are routinely deemed unfit for human consumption because of toxic
exposure to banned pesticides, overuse of pesticides, contact with human
excreta, exposure to carcinogenic and other dangerous chemicals, etc.


Again, pesticides and other chemicals are products of technology. Plants
weren't artificially toxic before chemicals were invented.

The context of this discussion is whether humans were intended to be
herbivores, carnivores, or omnivores. It is an evolutionary process and not
one that can be greatly effected by the last few hundred years that we've
had technology.

Positions and attitudes aside, what do you think humans were intended to eat
and why?


  #34 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-10-2005, 03:43 AM posted to alt.food.vegan
Scented Nectar
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup

"usual suspect" wrote in message
...
Skanky wrote:
"rick" wrote in message
nk.net...

"C. James Strutz" wrote in message
...

"rick" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"Scented Nectar" wrote in message
...

"rick" wrote in message
arthlink.net...

"Dave" wrote in message
oglegroups.com...

rick wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message
news:[email protected] googlegroups.com...

Some other beans can be poisonous if not cooked
properly but
red kidney
beans contain the highest concentrations of
Phytohaemagglutnin,
which
causes nausea and diarrhoea. Raw soya beans contain a
trypsin
inhibitor
which
prevents proper digestion of your food. If you follow
the
established
guildlines,
cooking from fresh should be perfectly safe.

===============================
LOL I guess you just proved that man is not a herbavore,
thanks....

(a) I don't believe in the "man is naturally a herbivore"
line
of argument and had already said as much.
(b) How have I just proved that man is not a herbivore?

============================
That you can't eat plants without cooking them...

Rick, you should know by now that
beans, grains and some other seeds
can be sprouted and eaten raw. And
of course many fruits and vegetables
and nuts can obviously be eaten raw too.

======================
And, as you are apparently too stupid to understand, there are
many plants that are outright poisonous for people, and many
many more that contain no nutrients for human consumption.
Name a meat that isn't.....

How about if you name a couple of the "many, many plants that
contain no nutrients for human consumption". Make sure they are
not contained in the set that "are outright poisonous for
people". Shouldn't be too difficult if there are so many of
them...

==========================
grass, fool....
and yet a real herbavore, cows, can easily convert that to
edible, tasty, healthy foods for people.



If I remember correctly,


We know that your memory is pretty ****ed up. No doubt it has something
to do with your drug abuse.

the juice of
all members of the grass family is
edible to humans.


That requires extensive processing. Most grasses can't even be juiced
with a standard juicer. And most grasses that are juiced aren't common
meadow grasses, but the sprouts of various edible grains.


No extensive processing is needed.
The juicer used usually is a manual
one requiring no electricity. A more
down to earth method would be to
chew on the grass, sucking out the
juices and then spitting out the
remaining fibers. Many people buy
a manual meat grinder for their
wheatgrass juicing.
http://tinyurl.com/8jm9n
I used to grow and drink wheatgrass
back in the early 80s. I got really
grossed out by the taste after a
while. Pills made of dried
wheatgrass are also available.



  #35 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-10-2005, 05:24 AM posted to alt.food.vegan
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup

C. James Strutz wrote:
...
Positions and attitudes aside, what do you think humans were intended to eat
and why?


I'm not hung up on "original" diet nonsense because we're not a static
species. We're constantly evolving and adapting. Accordingly, I think
humans and other primates thrive on a varied diet. We are what we are
today because someone swinging in the old family tree decided to try
eating meat. That eventually led to greater and more complex brain
development (more so for some of us than others).

http://www.fi.edu/brain/fats.htm


  #36 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-10-2005, 05:32 AM posted to alt.food.vegan
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup

Skanky wrote:
If I remember correctly,


We know that your memory is pretty ****ed up. No doubt it has something
to do with your drug abuse.


Established.

the juice of
all members of the grass family is
edible to humans.


That requires extensive processing. Most grasses can't even be juiced
with a standard juicer. And most grasses that are juiced aren't common
meadow grasses, but the sprouts of various edible grains.


No extensive processing is needed.


Bullshit. It requires mechanical extraction. Compare that to other foods
which can be juiced by hand, e.g., citrus fruits.

The juicer used usually is a manual
one


Mechanical. How the hell do you think that mechanical juicer is made --
with rocks or sticks? They're made out of cast iron or other metals
which are heated to super high heats to melt them before the various
parts can be molded and forged. There are several levels of processing
from mining to forging to assembly required before your stupid grass is
ever juiced.

requiring no electricity.


Guess again. You're so stupid you assume meat grinders appear
miraculously in stores so hippies like you can juice wheat and barley
grass. The processing of the juicer is required before you can process
the juice. You cannot leave out that process.

...
Pills made of dried
wheatgrass are also available.


Which requires even more processing: extraction, drying, encapsulation, etc.
  #37 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-10-2005, 06:37 AM posted to alt.food.vegan
Scented Nectar
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup

"usual suspect" wrote in message
...
Skanky wrote:
If I remember correctly,

We know that your memory is pretty ****ed up. No doubt it has something
to do with your drug abuse.


Established.


Why are you talking to yourself?

the juice of
all members of the grass family is
edible to humans.

That requires extensive processing. Most grasses can't even be juiced
with a standard juicer. And most grasses that are juiced aren't common
meadow grasses, but the sprouts of various edible grains.


No extensive processing is needed.


Bullshit. It requires mechanical extraction. Compare that to other foods
which can be juiced by hand, e.g., citrus fruits.


So, are you a Luddite or something?
Even the Amish would approve of
the manual wheatgrass juicers as
being primitive enough. Why are you
so freaked about humans finding
ways, mechanical in this case, to
ease a task?

The juicer used usually is a manual
one


Mechanical. How the hell do you think that mechanical juicer is made --
with rocks or sticks? They're made out of cast iron or other metals
which are heated to super high heats to melt them before the various
parts can be molded and forged. There are several levels of processing
from mining to forging to assembly required before your stupid grass is
ever juiced.


So, you're wanting people to regress
to the stone age? No metal ages for
you. Do you feel that metal forging is
wrong?

requiring no electricity.


Guess again. You're so stupid you assume meat grinders appear
miraculously in stores so hippies like you can juice wheat and barley
grass. The processing of the juicer is required before you can process
the juice. You cannot leave out that process.


Why is that initial process so bad?

...
Pills made of dried
wheatgrass are also available.


Which requires even more processing: extraction, drying, encapsulation,

etc.

What's wrong with that?


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/



  #38 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-10-2005, 03:07 PM posted to alt.food.vegan
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup

Skanky wrote:
the juice of
all members of the grass family is
edible to humans.

That requires extensive processing. Most grasses can't even be juiced
with a standard juicer. And most grasses that are juiced aren't common
meadow grasses, but the sprouts of various edible grains.

No extensive processing is needed.


Bullshit. It requires mechanical extraction. Compare that to other foods
which can be juiced by hand, e.g., citrus fruits.


So


I can see how your feeble brain cell would stumble upon consideration of
all the processes involved to get a little bit of juice from a whole lot
of inputs. You only want to look at the grass (as usual). The processing
of the juice is much more complex than your brain cell can grasp because
such processing has to include all the inputs required and not just the
grass. Just the mechanical grinder/juicer requires extensive processing:
mining, melting, casting, forging, etc. Without it, no grass juice.

are you a Luddite or something?


No, you're building yet another strawman.

Why are you so freaked


I'm not freaked, you freak. You challenged Rick and made the foolish
claim that "no extensive processing is needed" to get nutrients from
grasses. I've explained why you're wrong. In order to get nutrients from
grasses, ore must be first mined and processed into mechanical devices
which can extract said nutrients. You get no nutrients from the grass if
that manufacturing process is skipped. Chewing on it -- your fall back
position -- won't return the number of calories it takes to chew cud in
the first place.

The juicer used usually is a manual
one


Mechanical. How the hell do you think that mechanical juicer is made --
with rocks or sticks? They're made out of cast iron or other metals
which are heated to super high heats to melt them before the various
parts can be molded and forged. There are several levels of processing
from mining to forging to assembly required before your stupid grass is
ever juiced.


So


Your poor little brain cell must be having such a difficult time.

you're wanting people to regress
to the stone age?


Strawman.

Do you feel that metal forging is wrong?


Non sequitur. You're avoiding the discussion of all the steps of
processing juice from grasses, and looking like a feeble ass doing it.

requiring no electricity.


Guess again. You're so stupid you assume meat grinders appear
miraculously in stores so hippies like you can juice wheat and barley
grass. The processing of the juicer is required before you can process
the juice. You cannot leave out that process.


Why is that initial process so bad?


It's not a question of being bad, it's just an appropriate response to
your ridiculous claim that "no extensive processing is needed" to get
nutrients from grass.

...

Pills made of dried
wheatgrass are also available.


Which requires even more processing: extraction, drying, encapsulation,
etc.


What's wrong with that?


Ask yourself that question after re-reading your statement about how "no
extensive processing is needed" a few times. Dumb ass.
  #39 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-10-2005, 03:51 PM posted to alt.food.vegan
C. James Strutz
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup


"usual suspect" wrote in message
...
C. James Strutz wrote:
...
Positions and attitudes aside, what do you think humans were intended to
eat and why?


I'm not hung up on "original" diet nonsense because we're not a static
species. We're constantly evolving and adapting. Accordingly, I think
humans and other primates thrive on a varied diet. We are what we are
today because someone swinging in the old family tree decided to try
eating meat. That eventually led to greater and more complex brain
development (more so for some of us than others).

http://www.fi.edu/brain/fats.htm


Very interesting. The theory is that brain function increased in humans when
they began eating meat. Ultimately, it is the omega-3 and omega-6 fatty
acids that are transformed into longer chained fatty acids which incorporate
into brain cells. Today we know that there are sources of essential fatty
acids other than meat. Early humans must have eaten plant based foods that
also contained essential fatty acids: green leafy vegetables, seeds, and
nuts. I wonder if they just didn't get them in sufficient quantity until
they began eating meat.

Eating a varied diet is good as long as you get enough essential fatty acids
while avoiding trans fats, at least where it concerns the care and feeding
of the brain.

BTW, sorry to hear that the Astros were swept in the World Series. It was a
great season to make it that far...


  #40 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 28-10-2005, 07:00 PM posted to alt.food.vegan
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup

C. James Strutz wrote:
Positions and attitudes aside, what do you think humans were intended to
eat and why?


I'm not hung up on "original" diet nonsense because we're not a static
species. We're constantly evolving and adapting. Accordingly, I think
humans and other primates thrive on a varied diet. We are what we are
today because someone swinging in the old family tree decided to try
eating meat. That eventually led to greater and more complex brain
development (more so for some of us than others).

http://www.fi.edu/brain/fats.htm


Very interesting.


It is, and I think the concept of evolution -- dynamic adaptation and
physiological and genetic changes ultimately stemming from it -- shows
the folly of the peculiar suggestions made by dietary Luddites (e.g.,
vegan raw food advocates) that modern man should base his diet on either
what other primate species eat or what they think certain early hominids
ate.

Their arguments about comparative anatomy are specious because evolution
isn't linear, and it isn't even consistent within the same species. We
don't have claws our mouths filled with canines for shredding raw meat
because our brains evolved quickly enough that we had the cognitive
ability to develop tools like knives and we used fire to cook meat (and
plants that we couldn't eat without cooking).

The theory is that brain function increased in humans when
they began eating meat. Ultimately, it is the omega-3 and omega-6 fatty
acids that are transformed into longer chained fatty acids which incorporate
into brain cells.


Principally the omega-3. Plant-based foods are rich in omega-6 FAs.
Speaking with respect to contemporary health, most people have diets
with deficiencies in omega-3 and surpluses of omega-6. This FA imbalance
is associated with higher incidence of heart disease, neurological
issues, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega-3_fatty_acid

And a site I use with a dose of caution:
Generally our diet contains far to much omega 6 fats. Experts
looking at the dietary ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids
suggest that in early human history the ratio was about 1:1.
Currently most Americans eat a dietary ratio that falls between
20:1 and 50:1. The optimal ratio is most likely closer to the
original ratio of 1:1. For most of us this means greatly
reducing the omega-6 fatty acids we consume and increasing the
amount of omega-3 fatty acids.

Please recognize that we get ALL the omega-6 and omega-9 fat we
need from food. We do NOT need to take any supplements for these
fats. Many of the omega fat supplements you see in health food
stores will only serve to worsen your health, not improve it as
they contain omega 6 fats which will worsen your omega-6 to
omega-3 ratio.
http://www.mercola.com/2002/mar/27/omega3_fats.htm

Today we know that there are sources of essential fatty
acids other than meat.


Not all fatty acids are created equal. I addressed this issue a couple
weeks ago. The differences between the plant-based and animal-based FAs
are substantial, and the research seems to confirm it. Flax isn't a
direct substitute for the FAs found in oily cold-water fish because the
omega-3 FAs in the flax are short-chained and because the flax contains
a tremendous amount of omega-6. In comparison, fish oils are
long-chained and have a lot more omega-3 than omega-6.

http://efaeducation.nih.gov/sig/esstable.html

Early humans must have eaten plant based foods that
also contained essential fatty acids: green leafy vegetables, seeds, and
nuts. I wonder if they just didn't get them in sufficient quantity until
they began eating meat.


Meat's nutrients are concentrated, especially when discussing fats and
fatty acids. A small serving of salmon or herring contains more EFAs
than a couple pounds of leafy greens.

Eating a varied diet is good as long as you get enough essential fatty acids
while avoiding trans fats, at least where it concerns the care and feeding
of the brain.


Avoiding transfats is quite easy. Searching through BS hype about the
latest health fads to get to the truth takes more effort, but it's worth it.

BTW, sorry to hear that the Astros were swept in the World Series. It was a
great season to make it that far...


No complaints about it at all. I think their season and postseason
would've been more productive had they not tied up the entire winter in
pursuing Carlos Beltran. I hope they learned their lesson from that fiasco.

Here's to the Pens for finally winning last night.


  #41 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 29-10-2005, 08:55 PM posted to alt.food.vegan
C. James Strutz
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup


"usual suspect" wrote in message
...
C. James Strutz wrote:
Positions and attitudes aside, what do you think humans were intended to
eat and why?

I'm not hung up on "original" diet nonsense because we're not a static
species. We're constantly evolving and adapting. Accordingly, I think
humans and other primates thrive on a varied diet. We are what we are
today because someone swinging in the old family tree decided to try
eating meat. That eventually led to greater and more complex brain
development (more so for some of us than others).

http://www.fi.edu/brain/fats.htm


Very interesting.


It is, and I think the concept of evolution -- dynamic adaptation and
physiological and genetic changes ultimately stemming from it -- shows the
folly of the peculiar suggestions made by dietary Luddites (e.g., vegan
raw food advocates) that modern man should base his diet on either what
other primate species eat or what they think certain early hominids ate.


Maybe so if that's their rationalle. I had always assumed that the raw
foodists were mostly concerned about health - that cooking diminishes the
nutritional value of food. In the same light, I don't think that anyone here
is arguing that people should be vegetarians because they think humans were
intended to eat plants. This threat drifted awhile back when somebody made
that comment that they didn't think that humans were intended to eat only
plants. In the end, it's not as much a matter of intention as it is cause
and effect in our evolutionary process.

Not all fatty acids are created equal. I addressed this issue a couple
weeks ago. The differences between the plant-based and animal-based FAs
are substantial, and the research seems to confirm it. Flax isn't a direct
substitute for the FAs found in oily cold-water fish because the omega-3
FAs in the flax are short-chained and because the flax contains a
tremendous amount of omega-6. In comparison, fish oils are long-chained
and have a lot more omega-3 than omega-6.


Is this why you started eating fish again?


  #42 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 31-10-2005, 05:58 PM posted to alt.food.vegan
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bean Soup

C. James Strutz wrote:
Positions and attitudes aside, what do you think humans were intended to
eat and why?

I'm not hung up on "original" diet nonsense because we're not a static
species. We're constantly evolving and adapting. Accordingly, I think
humans and other primates thrive on a varied diet. We are what we are
today because someone swinging in the old family tree decided to try
eating meat. That eventually led to greater and more complex brain
development (more so for some of us than others).

http://www.fi.edu/brain/fats.htm

Very interesting.


It is, and I think the concept of evolution -- dynamic adaptation and
physiological and genetic changes ultimately stemming from it -- shows the
folly of the peculiar suggestions made by dietary Luddites (e.g., vegan
raw food advocates) that modern man should base his diet on either what
other primate species eat or what they think certain early hominids ate.


Maybe so if that's their rationalle.


By and large, they base their arguments on it.

I had always assumed that the raw
foodists were mostly concerned about health - that cooking diminishes the
nutritional value of food.


Read their literature or look at their websites. Raw diet advocates
almost always point back to fruigivorous primates and what they consider
to be early hominid diets. They suggest from the past that modern man's
anatomy and physiology hasn't changed significantly so it's accordingly
healthier for modern man to eat what some early hominid did (or what
they *claim* an early hominid ate).

Look, too, at the counter-claims like those found on beyondveg.com. The
author of that site, a vegetarian, deals extensively with the strange
claims made by raw faddists about early diet.

In the same light, I don't think that anyone here
is arguing that people should be vegetarians because they think humans were
intended to eat plants.


Skanky has made the same "frugivore" error others here have made with
respect to the issue. I think it's appropriate to address that claim
since it's repeated so frequently.

This threat drifted awhile back when somebody made
that comment that they didn't think that humans were intended to eat only
plants. In the end, it's not as much a matter of intention as it is cause
and effect in our evolutionary process.


I disagree to a great extent. In the end, some of the veg-ns continue to
repeat the claim that we're not meant to eat ANY meat without offering
much (if any) evidence. They tend point to point back to "origins" and
comparative anatomy. They also tend to run away when it's shown that not
only did early hominids eat some meat and it had something to do with
our evolution (especially cognitive evolution), but that other primates
they consider frugivores are actually omnivores.

Not all fatty acids are created equal. I addressed this issue a couple
weeks ago. The differences between the plant-based and animal-based FAs
are substantial, and the research seems to confirm it. Flax isn't a direct
substitute for the FAs found in oily cold-water fish because the omega-3
FAs in the flax are short-chained and because the flax contains a
tremendous amount of omega-6. In comparison, fish oils are long-chained
and have a lot more omega-3 than omega-6.


Is this why you started eating fish again?


Not so much that as the fact that I've remained open-minded about what
research shows with respect to benefits of dietary variety. I also don't
share the knee-jerk opposition to eating any meat that many other
vegetarians -- and *all* vegans -- have.


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
Bean Soup With Ham jackie Recipes (moderated) 0 27-04-2007 02:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:09 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"

 

Copyright © 2017