Fast Food Nation

> It contains B12, if I remember. Plant matter does not,
>or contains trace amounts. Aren't true vegans required to pop
>a B12 pill, although our bodies do recycle it to some level?

B12 is obtained from bacteria,which is where the animals get it from (from soil organisms they ingest). Nowdays, vegans would have a hard time getting it from plants (unless we always grew out own and rinsed them, rather than washed them thoroughly), but if one were to eat the way primitive humans did, and not brush one's teeth then it's available to us the same way it is to animals: both from soil organisms and from bacteria in the mouth.

What is your reference to cell types and receptors? That is something I've never heard before.

IMO, omnivore doesn't mean "must eat animal and plant foods," but "may eat animal or plant foods," so the choice is up to us, and as a civilized society, there's really only one choice that makes sense.
 
> It contains B12, if I remember. Plant matter does not,
>or contains trace amounts. Aren't true vegans required to pop
>a B12 pill, although our bodies do recycle it to some level?

B12 is obtained from bacteria,which is where the animals get it from (from soil organisms they ingest). Nowdays, vegans would have a hard time getting it from plants (unless we always grew out own and rinsed them, rather than washed them thoroughly), but if one were to eat the way primitive humans did, and not brush one's teeth then it's available to us the same way it is to animals: both from soil organisms and from bacteria in the mouth.

What is your reference to cell types and receptors? That is something I've never heard before.

IMO, omnivore doesn't mean "must eat animal and plant foods," but "may eat animal or plant foods," so the choice is up to us, and as a civilized society, there's really only one choice that makes sense.
 
>The tooth argument is not relevant as I have stated already.
>Humans have evolved using tools and intelligence which means
>we have no need for things like claws and teeth that true
>carnivores have.
>You are oversimplifying the comparisons.


I do not think the tooth argument is irrelevant, as the proportion of teeth best suited for grain/plant consumption has not changed from primitive man to now. Nor has it changed (at least not substantially) in herbivorous or carnivorous animals.

I'm not arguing that we aren't omnivorous. What I argue is that doesn't mean we must eat meat (I've been going fine without it for 30 years now), but that we have a choice, which has favored our survival and evolution.
 
>The tooth argument is not relevant as I have stated already.
>Humans have evolved using tools and intelligence which means
>we have no need for things like claws and teeth that true
>carnivores have.
>You are oversimplifying the comparisons.


I do not think the tooth argument is irrelevant, as the proportion of teeth best suited for grain/plant consumption has not changed from primitive man to now. Nor has it changed (at least not substantially) in herbivorous or carnivorous animals.

I'm not arguing that we aren't omnivorous. What I argue is that doesn't mean we must eat meat (I've been going fine without it for 30 years now), but that we have a choice, which has favored our survival and evolution.
 
>I disagree on plant sources being easier to get carbs from
>than meat. I believe meat is a more concentrated source of
>nutrients.

Well, you do sound educated, but this shows your lack of knowlege. Animal foods do not contain ANY substantial amount of carbohydrates (the exception being dairy...which contains a form of carbohydrate that many people have trouble digesting after weening )


>Vegetarians may need to start
>worrying about elevated homocysteine levels. This may be
>implicated in heart disease.

Yes, if one doesn't obtain sufficient B12.


>In my opinion animals are here for our benefit, whether to serve as pets or worker animals or to be served at the dinner table.
>Being omnivores, we as humans get the best of both worlds. Why
>anyone would want to give up meat or vegetables in favor of
>one or the other just boggles me.

Some people used to think that humans of races other than their own were here for their benefit. And some men used to think that women were here for their benefit.
 
>I disagree on plant sources being easier to get carbs from
>than meat. I believe meat is a more concentrated source of
>nutrients.

Well, you do sound educated, but this shows your lack of knowlege. Animal foods do not contain ANY substantial amount of carbohydrates (the exception being dairy...which contains a form of carbohydrate that many people have trouble digesting after weening )


>Vegetarians may need to start
>worrying about elevated homocysteine levels. This may be
>implicated in heart disease.

Yes, if one doesn't obtain sufficient B12.


>In my opinion animals are here for our benefit, whether to serve as pets or worker animals or to be served at the dinner table.
>Being omnivores, we as humans get the best of both worlds. Why
>anyone would want to give up meat or vegetables in favor of
>one or the other just boggles me.

Some people used to think that humans of races other than their own were here for their benefit. And some men used to think that women were here for their benefit.
 
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. -Mahatma Gandhi"
 
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. -Mahatma Gandhi"
 
>Well, to throw a whole new wrench into this, a lot of
>scientists believe that we evolved away from the other
>primates and developed a larger brain, and even language
>because we learned to hunt. Hunting, especially for a
>creature without fang or claw, required tools. We needed to
>develop training methods for our children and others, and
>strategies to hunt. We needed flexibility and creativity
>because animals changed, and circumstances changed - we had to
>learn to think on our feet. And some think that language
>started as a way to communicate during the hunt. A few simple
>warnings spoken because hand signals and other ways of
>communication would not be noticed when all eyes are
>concentrating on the task at hand.


Learning to hunt may have contributed to the evolution of our species, but that doesn't mean that we would not have evolved had we not learned to do so. Learning to build effective shelters, learning to create gardens for food, any task that required cooperation and the use of tools could have done so, and possibly did (no one knows) as could have learning to work together to wipe out other tribes and take their possessions.

In any case, whether hunting was a contributing factor to our evolution is a moot point when talking about dietary/ethical choices today.
 
>Well, to throw a whole new wrench into this, a lot of
>scientists believe that we evolved away from the other
>primates and developed a larger brain, and even language
>because we learned to hunt. Hunting, especially for a
>creature without fang or claw, required tools. We needed to
>develop training methods for our children and others, and
>strategies to hunt. We needed flexibility and creativity
>because animals changed, and circumstances changed - we had to
>learn to think on our feet. And some think that language
>started as a way to communicate during the hunt. A few simple
>warnings spoken because hand signals and other ways of
>communication would not be noticed when all eyes are
>concentrating on the task at hand.


Learning to hunt may have contributed to the evolution of our species, but that doesn't mean that we would not have evolved had we not learned to do so. Learning to build effective shelters, learning to create gardens for food, any task that required cooperation and the use of tools could have done so, and possibly did (no one knows) as could have learning to work together to wipe out other tribes and take their possessions.

In any case, whether hunting was a contributing factor to our evolution is a moot point when talking about dietary/ethical choices today.
 
I have nothing new to add. I just want to say thanks Kathryn for doing what you do so well, representing veganism though logical and supported arguments. I am often too busy at work and don't always have internet access, so I can't post too frequently. But I just want to say that I appreciate your contributions.

I'm not too interested in arguments claiming that humans have survived because of meat. OK, fine, duh! Does that matter anymore? I agree that everyone is free to make their own choices when it comes to this issue, but the defensiveness of some people is so disappointing to me. Is it really so difficult to just consider the possibility that animal products don't HAVE to be a part of our diets? I guess so. Oh well... And this thread was looking like it wasn't going to go in that direction. *sigh*

Amy
 
I have nothing new to add. I just want to say thanks Kathryn for doing what you do so well, representing veganism though logical and supported arguments. I am often too busy at work and don't always have internet access, so I can't post too frequently. But I just want to say that I appreciate your contributions.

I'm not too interested in arguments claiming that humans have survived because of meat. OK, fine, duh! Does that matter anymore? I agree that everyone is free to make their own choices when it comes to this issue, but the defensiveness of some people is so disappointing to me. Is it really so difficult to just consider the possibility that animal products don't HAVE to be a part of our diets? I guess so. Oh well... And this thread was looking like it wasn't going to go in that direction. *sigh*

Amy
 
I agree Kathryn, you often say what I want to say, but more eloquently. I believe we should be caretakers of the earth, not consumers. The mentality that everything is here for our benefit is why the world is in the mess it's in right now.
 
I agree Kathryn, you often say what I want to say, but more eloquently. I believe we should be caretakers of the earth, not consumers. The mentality that everything is here for our benefit is why the world is in the mess it's in right now.
 
I think the whole subject of what people eat is very interesting. What is taboo to eat for some people in the world is very natural for other people in another part of the world to eat.

Case in point - the whole saving horses from slaughter in this country to exprted to other countires to eat - most notably France. I love love love my horse and I would eat my own hand before I would eat a horse, but I'm not going to hold it against the French even though I've seen pictures of the inside of equine slaughterhouses. It's disgusting.

I think there can be slaughter and rendering of animals that minimizess trauma to the animals and shows respect for them. Temple Grandin talks about the kosher slaughterhouses in her book "Talking in Pictures" and comments on that very thing. She says the mood is very solemn and calm, and respectful to the animals. There are prayers and blessings said for the animals, and they don't freak out like they do in the industrial rendering plants; they are quiet and the whole atmosphere very different from the big slaughterhouses.

However, in this country it's the almighty dollar that does the talking.

Aw, damn, I need to stop reading this thread because I'm completely bummed again...

Susan L.G.
 
I think the whole subject of what people eat is very interesting. What is taboo to eat for some people in the world is very natural for other people in another part of the world to eat.

Case in point - the whole saving horses from slaughter in this country to exprted to other countires to eat - most notably France. I love love love my horse and I would eat my own hand before I would eat a horse, but I'm not going to hold it against the French even though I've seen pictures of the inside of equine slaughterhouses. It's disgusting.

I think there can be slaughter and rendering of animals that minimizess trauma to the animals and shows respect for them. Temple Grandin talks about the kosher slaughterhouses in her book "Talking in Pictures" and comments on that very thing. She says the mood is very solemn and calm, and respectful to the animals. There are prayers and blessings said for the animals, and they don't freak out like they do in the industrial rendering plants; they are quiet and the whole atmosphere very different from the big slaughterhouses.

However, in this country it's the almighty dollar that does the talking.

Aw, damn, I need to stop reading this thread because I'm completely bummed again...

Susan L.G.
 
I am thankful for all the different opinions.. I also said I did not want to offend anyone by starting this post. I am sorry that it caused a little bit of "conflict". I was just curious about how people felt. Like Susan L.G. said, maybe we can just agree to disagree...;-)
 
I am thankful for all the different opinions.. I also said I did not want to offend anyone by starting this post. I am sorry that it caused a little bit of "conflict". I was just curious about how people felt. Like Susan L.G. said, maybe we can just agree to disagree...;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top