By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 12:06 - Mar 25 by Lord_Bony
There is no argument.
Humans are designed to eat both meat and vegetation. If this was not the case,we wouldn't survive past infancy.
It is the hormones and additives in some meats that are dangerous for us in modern times. Organic meat and fish is fine.
I do agree dairy and meat consumption should be restricted for good health.
This post has been edited by an administrator
There is every argument bony.
Humans CAN eat meat. It is unhealthy for us but we can. It is an advantage in survival or extreme situations such as the Eskimos and Maasai find themselves in where they have to. But our biology is herbivorous which is why meat harms us.
You are not in a survival situation and the natural and healthy food is plentiful. You agree you live a lot longer and are a lot healthier not eating meat... so why are you?
It is not the hormones or additives LB. Again look at your own example of the Maasai and Eskimos, neither of them are eating meat that has hormones or additives and their dietary disease rates are off the chart.
Hormones and additives are bad for you of course, but that is in addition to the meat itself as the above examples show. Hormones and additives do not make meat have trans and sat fats they are naturally there.
The World health organisation recommends your intake of trans fats be zero. That's the World Health Organisation not some vegan promotion source. I stay away from them myself.
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 12:24 - Mar 25 by Lord_Bony
I think we are omnivorous.
If you feed a herbivore like a sheep on nothing but meat it will die.
If you feed a human being on nothing but meat it will survive.
This post has been edited by an administrator
But it won't. Feed a human nothing but meat and it will die long before it should just as if you feed a sheep nothing but meat. The human may live longer than the sheep in relation to their expectancy granted. But again that isn't the point is it.
But yes we are omnivores in the sense we can process it, but it is not good for us. It is an evolutionary advantage for in extreme survival situations.
You aren't in an extreme survival situation and there is food plentiful that you agree will help you live longer and make you healthier. That's without going into the ethical side of it and the extremely harmful effects on our own habitat.
There is not a single argument for the consumption of meat in our diets other than taste. But some people like the taste of smoke, seems a silly argument when people are dying and getting diseases from it though.
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 12:30 - Mar 25 by E20Jack
But it won't. Feed a human nothing but meat and it will die long before it should just as if you feed a sheep nothing but meat. The human may live longer than the sheep in relation to their expectancy granted. But again that isn't the point is it.
But yes we are omnivores in the sense we can process it, but it is not good for us. It is an evolutionary advantage for in extreme survival situations.
You aren't in an extreme survival situation and there is food plentiful that you agree will help you live longer and make you healthier. That's without going into the ethical side of it and the extremely harmful effects on our own habitat.
There is not a single argument for the consumption of meat in our diets other than taste. But some people like the taste of smoke, seems a silly argument when people are dying and getting diseases from it though.
[Post edited 25 Mar 2018 12:35]
"But we are omnivores". Hooray ðŸ˜
I'll let you have this one bruv,I'm off to do a nice salad now...with some wild Alaskan salmon....hormone and chemical free....not like the mass produced farmed type.
Hope I survive the night with it!
PROUD RECIPIENT OF THE THIRD PLANET SWANS LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD.
"Per ardua ad astra"
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 12:39 - Mar 25 by Lord_Bony
"But we are omnivores". Hooray ðŸ˜
I'll let you have this one bruv,I'm off to do a nice salad now...with some wild Alaskan salmon....hormone and chemical free....not like the mass produced farmed type.
Hope I survive the night with it!
.....In the sense we can process a tiny amount, yes. But we have the biology of a herbivore - hence why eating meat is harmful to us. A cow is a herbivore too but can also process meat (very often meat in cow and chicken feed) it will technically make them an omnivore as a result - but it will be harmful to them as you noted yourself.
You may well survive the night Lord Bony. But I would certainly recommend you to rethink going back to your old dietary choices considering you got your diagnosis when on a meat eating diet.
The links are clear. I also urge you to look into why meat gives people a higher chance of such diseases as cancer as you seem to mistakenly think it is due to additives. The diseases are down to the composition of the meat itself not what is added to it - they don't help though.
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 12:45 - Mar 25 by E20Jack
.....In the sense we can process a tiny amount, yes. But we have the biology of a herbivore - hence why eating meat is harmful to us. A cow is a herbivore too but can also process meat (very often meat in cow and chicken feed) it will technically make them an omnivore as a result - but it will be harmful to them as you noted yourself.
You may well survive the night Lord Bony. But I would certainly recommend you to rethink going back to your old dietary choices considering you got your diagnosis when on a meat eating diet.
The links are clear. I also urge you to look into why meat gives people a higher chance of such diseases as cancer as you seem to mistakenly think it is due to additives. The diseases are down to the composition of the meat itself not what is added to it - they don't help though.
[Post edited 25 Mar 2018 12:59]
That is so arrogant, commenting on someone's illness in such a flippant way.
Totally out of order.
0
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 13:54 - Mar 25 with 876 views
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 13:54 - Mar 25 by E20Jack
I am not entirely sure what you read but there was absolutely nothing flippant or arrogant in anything I typed.
I have spoken with Lord Bony privately about his condition, I am sure he didn't take it as such.
Whether you incorrectly did is of no significance to anything.
It is flippant to use someone's serious illness to prove your theory and arrogant to set yourself up as the arbiter on this complex subject.
I can't speak for Lord Bony but if I had the terrible misfortune to suffer from any disease the last thing I would want is an obsessive like you telling me I'd caused it by my lifestyle.
0
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 15:47 - Mar 25 with 843 views
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 15:12 - Mar 25 by Ambergambler
It is flippant to use someone's serious illness to prove your theory and arrogant to set yourself up as the arbiter on this complex subject.
I can't speak for Lord Bony but if I had the terrible misfortune to suffer from any disease the last thing I would want is an obsessive like you telling me I'd caused it by my lifestyle.
You are not making much sense, just seems like you are using a pretty sensitive topic to point score which is odd.
There is undeniable links to cancer and a meat based diet, Lord Bony himself posted earlier in the thread stating that vegans have a lower chance of cancer (he was correct, this is not "my theory" as you put it, it is fact).
I did not say he caused it you utter moron. But when on the road to recovery, to return to a diet which has strong links to cancer is not something that I could read and not recommend he looks further into it as he clearly thought the links between the two were due to additives - which is not correct.
If it was the other way around I would hope someone would do the same for me. If you find that offensive then tough I guess. As I have told you myself and Bony have messaged privately regarding his condition I have no doubt he will know my intentions.
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 08:38 - Mar 25 by E20Jack
You can say it previously, you can say it in the future, you can say it in capitals, you can say it while swearing... it still won't make it true.
The development of the brain did come from carbohydrates this has been theorised and proven by scholars, professors and scientists the world over due to the rate of development 800,000 years ago accelerated at such s rate and tied in with the increase in starchy carbs particularly long chains of the simple sugar glucose or starches essential for brain development.
By all means if you have come up with a better and proofed theory by all means put it forward. But until that time we have to take what we know as fact. Starchy carbohydrates developed the brain.
Of course I bring in primates, why wouldn't I? Of course we are an independent species, but we still have the same biological traits. You are only backing up my point that our meat habit came via human interference and not nature.
Herbivores and carnivores digestive tract length... again there is no muddying of any waters. We have the biological make up of a herbivore. This again backs up the fact we are natural herbivores that are almost forcing themselves to be omnivorous beings. Our bodies can process meat but in incredibly small doses, again this would be in survival situations. We aren't in a survival situation, we don't need to, it's harmful - so why do it?
Trans fats are basically found in one place in nature - animal fat. You can dispute that til the cows come home but it is a fact I am afraid. The WHO (world health organisation) suggests we should be eating next to no trans fats. Does that sound like its good for you then? You answer.
No waffle here my friend, just fact and common sense. I would love it if you reciprocated. If we wanted to give ourselves an evolutionary advantage by forcing ourselves to eat meat then why does it shorten our lives? Your theory makes no sense, an evolutionary advantage would be for our food to make us thrive... you know, like a plant based diet does. Quite factually.
You really need to be bringing some sense to the table instead of playground antics Djack, you never know you may win me around. But in order to do that you will need to combat my facts (which is what they are) - saying such like as "billox" or whatever it is you keep repeating, really is not helping your stance or view. Have a chat, I could talk about this all day, I am a friendly soul - you may even like it.
[Post edited 25 Mar 2018 9:31]
"Trans fats are basically found in one place in nature - animal fat. You can dispute that til the cows come home but it is a fact I am afraid. The WHO (world health organisation) suggests we should be eating next to no trans fats. Does that sound like its good for you then? You answer."
What they said is actually this...
" One of the resulting recommendations aimed at reducing the risk of cardiovascular diseases and in promoting cardiovascular health was that diets should provide a very low intake of trans fatty acids (TFA), that is, less than 1% of total energy intake. The outcomes and recommendations of this Expert Consultation then provided the scientific basis for the WHO Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health (DPAS) endorsed by the 57th World Health Assembly in May 2004 (WHO, 2004)."
Unfortunately "trans fatty acids (TFA)" are the industrial version whilst the animal one is rTFA or ruminant TFA. I'll concede that the European WHO update document confuse the issue by lumping them together in their update and stating incorrectly (the actual position is quoted above - the TFA's)
"Evidence on the effects of industrially produced trans fats has been increasing over the past three decades. The 2003 WHO/FAO technical report series 916 stated that intake of trans fats should be as low as possible (<1% of total energy intake, which equates to no more than 2 g of trans fats per day for a person requiring 2000 kcal) (9). This guidance is mirrored by several other prominent bodies, including the European Commission ((EC) and the United States Department of Agriculture (2,3,10). "
The WHO themselves confuse the issue with their bulletin of 2013 and they mention
"Trans fats — also known as trans fatty acids — are naturally found in dairy and meat products but also generated by industrial processes to produce hard fats from vegetable oils. The industrially produced trans fats are also known as partially hydrogenated vegetable oils." They don't differentiate between the two and they mention the success of Denmark in banning TFA's but is only a ban on TFA's and not rTFA's.
The rTFA's in our meat consumption has not (yet) been proven to cause us major issues. Eating anything that has been cooked in or made with TFA's/partially hydrogenated oil is a danger.
We are omnivores, period.
[Post edited 25 Mar 2018 18:10]
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
0
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 18:57 - Mar 25 with 798 views
Inane Poll No1: How do you prefer your breakfast eggs? on 18:08 - Mar 25 by DJack
"Trans fats are basically found in one place in nature - animal fat. You can dispute that til the cows come home but it is a fact I am afraid. The WHO (world health organisation) suggests we should be eating next to no trans fats. Does that sound like its good for you then? You answer."
What they said is actually this...
" One of the resulting recommendations aimed at reducing the risk of cardiovascular diseases and in promoting cardiovascular health was that diets should provide a very low intake of trans fatty acids (TFA), that is, less than 1% of total energy intake. The outcomes and recommendations of this Expert Consultation then provided the scientific basis for the WHO Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health (DPAS) endorsed by the 57th World Health Assembly in May 2004 (WHO, 2004)."
Unfortunately "trans fatty acids (TFA)" are the industrial version whilst the animal one is rTFA or ruminant TFA. I'll concede that the European WHO update document confuse the issue by lumping them together in their update and stating incorrectly (the actual position is quoted above - the TFA's)
"Evidence on the effects of industrially produced trans fats has been increasing over the past three decades. The 2003 WHO/FAO technical report series 916 stated that intake of trans fats should be as low as possible (<1% of total energy intake, which equates to no more than 2 g of trans fats per day for a person requiring 2000 kcal) (9). This guidance is mirrored by several other prominent bodies, including the European Commission ((EC) and the United States Department of Agriculture (2,3,10). "
The WHO themselves confuse the issue with their bulletin of 2013 and they mention
"Trans fats — also known as trans fatty acids — are naturally found in dairy and meat products but also generated by industrial processes to produce hard fats from vegetable oils. The industrially produced trans fats are also known as partially hydrogenated vegetable oils." They don't differentiate between the two and they mention the success of Denmark in banning TFA's but is only a ban on TFA's and not rTFA's.
The rTFA's in our meat consumption has not (yet) been proven to cause us major issues. Eating anything that has been cooked in or made with TFA's/partially hydrogenated oil is a danger.
We are omnivores, period.
[Post edited 25 Mar 2018 18:10]
Wow is there anything left in that barrel you are scraping?
We are omnivores in the sense we CAN process a small amount of meat, due to having the physiology of a herbivore however, it is harmful - as confirmed by that massive cut and paste job you did.
So if we have established that it is bad for us. We have established that it shortens our lives. Have established that we get all we need from other sources (hence the 10 years longer life expectancy and lower cases of cancer, diabetes, stroke and heart disease), established that it is ruining our habitat and established that it is inflicting mass cruelty... remind me again why we are eating it?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
