Eating Cat And Dog Food To Save Money
70473...@compuserve.com
less than 20 cents a can, I've decided it is about time for me to start eating
cat and dog food for half my nourishment in order to save money.
I need any advice on this way of dining. Which are the best brands, are most
nutritious for humans, cooking tips, etc. Any help would appreciated.
Thanks
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Anon554860
>From: 70473...@compuserve.com
>Date: 12/25/98 9:03 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <760ggk$rlk$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
Cat and dog food is a very excellent source of nutrition and protein. I made
an excellent chili one time out of cat food that was very good. Put cheese and
onions on it, and there is no difference!
Enjoy
Mark Dunster
> After seeing cans of the cheapest cat food on sale at my local supermarket for
> less than 20 cents a can, I've decided it is about time for me to start eating
> cat and dog food for half my nourishment in order to save money.
> I need any advice on this way of dining. Which are the best brands, are most
> nutritious for humans, cooking tips, etc. Any help would appreciated.
> Thanks
You really should buy the best brand.... but this will set you back 30
cents a can. The extra 10 cents are worth it though.
Catatouille
Overall timing 1.5 hours
Freezing: Suitable
Serves: Family of 8, and assorted pets
2 large aubergines
1 lb courgettes (zuchini)
Salt and Pepper
3 large onions
2-3 garlic cloves
1 lb ripe tomatoes
5 tbsp olive oil
1 teaspoon sugar
1 can of dog food (30 cents)
1 can of cat food (30 cents)
Cut aubergines and courgettes into 1 inch chunks
Peel and slice onions
Crush garlic
Thinly slice tomatoes
Heat oil in flameproof casserole
Add spices, dog food and cat food to vegetables.
(Keep an eye out for Rover while doing this.)
Cook for 45 minutes till vegetables and dog/cat food are tender but not mushy.
Serve hot, or cool and chill before serving.
Best served with caviar and Martell Cognac.
Keep all pets outside during cooking.
Enjoy.
--
-mark dunster (to reply, take "removethis" out of my email address)
.CIG file follows.....
****************************************************************************
Quote of the year from David Goerlitz, cigarette model for seven years and
over 40 advertising campaigns: "I asked one of the R.J. Reynolds executives
why they weren't smoking (I thought this quite odd), and he turned to me and
said 'We don't smoke this shit, we just sell it. We reserve the right to
smoke for the young, the poor, the black, and the stupid.' "
****************************************************************************
Alan Horowitz
eating the cats and dogs after the sugar hits the fan (if you believe it
will) on/after 01/01/2000
The usual train of thought is to grab strays that are roaming the
countryside. Whreas others think that it's worth the effort to dognap 'em
coming out of a pet-grooming joint in a tony suburb. The ratiomale is,
these dogs are getting better groomings than the yuppies' own parents ar
out there in the medicare-mill nursing homes. And thus, the resulting meat
will be sort of analogous to Kobe beef.
--
Alan Horowitz al...@widomaker.com
Jean P Nance
Read the label on cat or dog food. It is a mixture of very low
grade fish, fowl, or meat, with lots of starch and water. You could
probably get much the same nourishment from four slices of bread,
made into a tuna fish sandwhich with 49 cent a can tuna.And, it
would taste like people food. Better, go vegetarian, a 29 cent
can of beans, or even better, a pound of the cheapest dry beans,
cooked up and served with rice or bread or potatoes, as a cheap
starch.
Cat and dog food doesn't have to taste good, since cats and dogs,
(in spite of the accounts of people with badly spoiled pets), will
eat what is put in front of them. There are plenty of economical
people food combinations. If you LIKE the taste of the stuff, go
ahead, but it is pretty foolish.
--
Steve
unsafe for human consumption.
Steve
On Fri, 25 Dec 1998 17:03:16 GMT, 70473...@compuserve.com wrote:
>After seeing cans of the cheapest cat food on sale at my local supermarket for
>less than 20 cents a can, I've decided it is about time for me to start eating
>cat and dog food for half my nourishment in order to save money.
>I need any advice on this way of dining. Which are the best brands, are most
>nutritious for humans, cooking tips, etc. Any help would appreciated.
>Thanks
>
Jean P Nance
"Dog and cat food contains unhealthy levels of germs/bacteria".
Very unlikely. For one thing, if there were bacteria in canned food,
at least most bacteria, the food would spoil in the can and would
be obviously, by look and smell, "rotten". Dog and cat food has sto
be subjected to the same heat and pressure that any other canned
food is subjected to, which kills most bacteria. I suppose it is
possible that some botulinum or other hardy spores would survive,
and in fact occasionally "people" food (especially canned fish),
is so contaminated. I have never heard, though, of dogs or cats
becoming ill from contaminated canned food. Ask a veterinarian.
--
Roger P Williams
> After seeing cans of the cheapest cat food on sale at my local supermarket
> for less than 20 cents a can, I've decided it is about time for me to start
> eating cat and dog food for half my nourishment in order to save money.
> I need any advice on this way of dining. Which are the best brands, are most
> nutritious for humans, cooking tips, etc. Any help would appreciated.
Technically better than starving, but not a good idea.
Animal feeds and human food are kept strictly separate because, if you
think the stories about what goes on in human-food-processing plants are
gross, you ain't heard _nuthin_ compared to the way pet foods are
prepared.
Much of the "animal protein" which goes into animal feed is the output of
rendering plants. You might want to do a web search on that phrase,
"rendering plant." It is basically a big continuous-process cooker. Into
the feed end they dump all the parts of the animal humans don't eat, and
any animals humans don't eat, and anything else that might contain
protein. Out of the other end comes a kind of sterile mush which is
technically capable of supporting life.
Although the mush is sterile, the rendering process does not strip out
pollutants and certain drug molecules and there is a worry that the level
of these in the animal-feed stream will rise steadily as one of the inputs
into the rendering plants is the animals which have been eating the feed.
(Nobody can quite get a straight answer from the pet food industry on
whether Fido or Fluffy might make it to the rendering plant after, say,
the Humane Society performs a pet-population-reduction operation on them.)
One of the chicken processing plants I service has a rendering plant which
is used to process the feathers and guts. Believe me, if you _ever_
smelled a rendering plant, you would _not_ want to eat anything that came
out of it.
--Roger
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What will people of the future think of us? Will they say, as
Roger Williams said of some of the Massachusetts Indians, that
we were wolves with the minds of men? That we resigned our humanity?
They will have the right. -- C.P. Snow
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ann Mcmanus
>
>On Sun, 27 Dec 1998 15:26:51 GMT, jp...@prairienet.org (Jean P Nance)
>wrote:
>
>>........ I have never heard, though, of dogs or cats
>
>
>start eating pet food. If possible, they might visit a pet food
>factory. I don't really know but have read in several places that
>blood meal and similar products can and might be stuff swept off the
>floor in sawdust, etc., cooked and then mixed with the other stuff.
Ever seen how commercial sausage (bologna, hot dogs icluded) is made??
Not something that a squeamish person should view!
Ann
Scott and Heather Strang
>After seeing cans of the cheapest cat food on sale at my local supermarket for
>less than 20 cents a can, I've decided it is about time for me to start eating
>cat and dog food for half my nourishment in order to save money.
>I need any advice on this way of dining. Which are the best brands, are most
>nutritious for humans, cooking tips, etc. Any help would appreciated.
Didn't I see this post last year? My dog told me (through mental telepathy
of course ;-) ) that Mighty Dog is good.
How about just attacking some live chickens; all dogs love that.
Scott
Scott and Heather Strang
All work and no play is good for you
helps build character.
THIS TRANSMISSION TERMINATED
ileneb
worse for the wear.
Ilene B and Kiko&Kona
Roger P Williams
> >Believe me, if you _ever_
> >smelled a rendering plant, you would _not_ want to eat anything that came
> >out of it.
> Visit your local hot dog plant and you might come out feeling the same
> way. Many many years ago, I took my young children to the Valley
> Dale plant in Bristol, VA. The people were nice, but the smell was
> overwhelming. Neither my children nor I ate hot dogs for about 6
> months after that.
Yes, all plants with kill floors (or which process direct kill floor
product) have that overwhelming smell of death about them. Second day on
the job (this was 15 years ago) I visited the plant which made patties for
Burger King. Same result -- it was about six months before I ate another
hamburger. You get over it, though.
The rendering plant is much worse. It makes the normal processing-plant
smell smell like Chanel No. 5 by comparison. In fact, the rendering plant
is not a basic part of the chicken processing facility I mentioned; it's
an add-on which many chicken plants don't have. The employees say you
NEVER get used to it, like the other kill floor smells, and are quick to
point out it's the rendering plant, not the rest of the operation, when a
visitor points it out.
mark
save money??? Dog and cat food are made for dogs and cats!
Save money by eliminating meat from your diet and shopping at low-cost
grocery stores. Fill up on inexpensive rice/grains and ad vegetables and
fruits as sides. It will be healthier and cheaper! Also eliminate all junk
food.
mark
Ann Mcmanus
Mark, Mark, Mark, Mark, Mark!
Everyone else realized it was the evil-troll-type who posted this note
and ~most~ responded in the same lighthearted vein that they did to the
frugal Lesbian thread.
Please don't take things so seriously.
;-]
Ann
Bob VonMoss
Ann Mcmanus
If you're going to get the tuna, get the kind with the chunks of egg
already in it. That way, you need only add onion and mayo to make a
decent sammich
Ann
C.A.S.
> >
> >> After seeing cans of the cheapest cat food on sale at my local
> supermarket for
> >> less than 20 cents a can, I've decided it is about time for me to
> start eating
> >> cat and dog food for half my nourishment in order to save money.
> >> I need any advice on this way of dining. Which are the best brands,
> are most
> >> nutritious for humans, cooking tips, etc. Any help would appreciated.
>
Since your question was posted to the frugalista
news group, I assume you are interested in the most
cost effective methods.
I think you should learn to catch mice...
I believe there were some recipes in "Oliver Twist" for
various meat pies.....
( big grin ) Andy in Dallas
Carol
>
> After seeing cans of the cheapest cat food on sale at my local
> supermarket for less than 20 cents a can, I've decided it is about
> time for me to start eating cat and dog food for half my nourishment
> in order to save money. I need any advice on this way of dining.
> Which are the best brands, are most nutritious for humans, cooking
I'd suggest that you do some research on what is actually IN that
stuff. I wouldn't feed it to a dog or cat, let alone myself. To
get more nutrition for your dollar is better than getting simply
more food for it. With that end in mind, it would be most cost-
effective to eat uncooked homegrown fruits and veggies. Since
that isn't an option for many of us, some compromises do have to
be made, but commercial pet food should be a very last resort.
Good luck to you.
Carol
Jean P Nance
I didn't consider the "cat and dog food" question a troll. We
do hear of destitute people who do eat the stuff. Destiture, and
very badly informed. My reply was in earnest, and looked at the
situation as purely a matter of "nutrition for the buck", in which
case cat and dog food is not a frugal choice.
--
Time Pilot
wrote:
>
> Very unlikely. For one thing, if there were bacteria in canned food,
> at least most bacteria, the food would spoil in the can and would
> be obviously, by look and smell, "rotten". Dog and cat food has sto
> be subjected to the same heat and pressure that any other canned
> food is subjected to, which kills most bacteria. I suppose it is
> possible that some botulinum or other hardy spores would survive,
> and in fact occasionally "people" food (especially canned fish),
> is so contaminated. I have never heard, though, of dogs or cats
> becoming ill from contaminated canned food. Ask a veterinarian.
Guess where USDA Condemed meat ends up
=======
Time Pilot <haxo...@hotmail.com>
There is no way they can keep up with us.
Robert F Wieland
published that 30% of the pet food sold in this country is bought by
people who can't afford better.
Leigh R Hidell
Jean, I agree w/ you. It is supposedly common in the western
states to eat pet food when starving. Author Philip
K. Dick did it. People panic & think they need "protein"
when what they most likely need is calories, which
can come from carbohydrates like fruits & vegetables.
Although neither will win any awards for nutrition,
my guess is that a 25 cent box of the cheapest
macaroni dinner will be more filling than one of
those tiny cans of dog food for 20 cents. In fact,
two can eat the macaroni dinner, especially if
you supplement with a salad made from "free" weeds
like mustard, chickweed, etc. The 25 cent meal
certainly does exist, but cat/dog food is not a very
practical part of it. IMHO anyway.
Good luck, Leigh
Wende A. Feller
>
> Jean, I agree w/ you. It is supposedly common in the western
> states to eat pet food when starving. Author Philip
> K. Dick did it.
Sorry to nitpick, but in the sense of opening a can of Alpo, no, he
didn't. Phil Dick and his wife went to the local butcher shop and bought
the horse meat that most customers purchased to feed their pets. They
were just buying a very cheap cut of meat (in the same forms, steak or
ground, that we ordinarily buy beef), not eating processed pet food. In
later interviews, he loved playing up the "we ate dog food" angle, but
if you check his detailed biography, it's just horse meat.
Wende
Leigh R Hidell
> if you check his detailed biography, it's just horse meat.
Wende is correct. It *was* horse meat. But I think
he got it even cheaper because it wasn't put up
in neat little cans....He made a big deal about
shopping at the Lucky Dog Pet Store or whatever
instead of for groceries? In any case, I think
he could have done OK w/out, but there was a lot
of pro-protein hysteria in the 50s when all this
was going on....Good luck, Leigh
Chloe
that (before I knew him) when he lived in Germany and was broke, really
broke, he lived for a week on the equivalent of a 5 pound bag of sugar.
Leigh R Hidell wrote in message <76b2rg$6...@junkie.gnofn.org>...
:
:> I didn't consider the "cat and dog food" question a troll. We
:> do hear of destitute people who do eat the stuff. Destiture, and
:> very badly informed. My reply was in earnest, and looked at the
:> situation as purely a matter of "nutrition for the buck", in which
:> case cat and dog food is not a frugal choice.
:
:Jean, I agree w/ you. It is supposedly common in the western
:states to eat pet food when starving. Author Philip
:K. Dick did it. People panic & think they need "protein"
:
hillary gorman
*Great link. Hmm, I better change my cats' diet. My 8-yo cat has a mild
*problem with his kidney function recently detected in a test, and the
*vet said it's due to too much protein in commercial pet food. Now that
Dr. Ken Bovee, one of my professors, and an expert veterinary
nephrologist, told us in school last year that the whole "low protein
diet" thing for cats in renal failure is completely bogus.
--
hillary gorman...........Official Token Female..........hillary@netaxs.com
"So that's 2 T-1s and a newsfeed....would you like clues with that?"
hil...@hillary.net: for debugging your net or deworming your pet
Net Access...The NSP for ISPs....The NOC that rocks around the clock.
Chloe
I've come to the conclusion as a layperson after 30 years of trying to
understand good feline nutrition (and feline medicine in general) that
there's a lot of areas nobody knows a much about, and that accounts for much
of the differing advice. It is probably reasonable that an excessive amount
of research doesn't go into such study when we still haven't found cures for
cancer and AIDS, and when we have such an oversupply of domestic pets
anyway. Not only that, even in people medicine you can find a lot of
conflicting information. Also I think sometimes what is appropriate care
varies from animal to animal within the species.
I try to feed my cats medium-quality food or above, keep them away from
infectious agents or other things that might harm them, provide plenty of
clean water, and give them a nonstressful environment where they get a lot
of people attention and affection. Overall that has seemed to keep them
pretty healthy, with the exception of the one that evidently was already
infected with FIP when I got him.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The difference between being diplomatic and undiplomatic is the difference
between saying "When I look at you time stands still" and "Your face
could stop a clock." ~~ Anon.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ken wrote in message <368a9843...@newstoo.hiwaay.net>...
:On 30 Dec 1998 02:24:54 GMT, hil...@hillary.net (hillary gorman)
:wrote:
:......
:>Dr. Ken Bovee, one of my professors, and an expert veterinary
:>nephrologist, told us in school last year that the whole "low protein
:>diet" thing for cats in renal failure is completely bogus.
:
:
:So who's right? Is this a case like when a jury hears one expert
:witness who is offset by another expert witness? It would be
:interesting to know why your expert veterinary neprhrologist say it's
:completely bogus. And, if he is right, what is his opinion?
:
:I would also be interested in is opinion of canned cat and dog food as
:well as the dry version. Is it as bad as the link suggests it is or
:is it simple a lower grade meat products that humans eat?
:
:Ken
Jean P Nance
During WW II, horse meat was sold in one pound bricks in the frozen
food compartment.It was not marked as "Pet food", it was up to the
buyer whether they wanted to eat it or feed it to pets. I never tried
it. I did buy some a few times, when I was in charge of about 100
laboratory rats that seemed be be malnourished, and were having a
high death rate. Actually, the dog food we had been feeding the rats
had enough protein, that was not their problem. The rats fed carrots
recovered. It was vitamin A they were lacking. "Rat chow" was just
not availalable at that time.
It is just a cultural thing, that people are revolted by the idea
of eating horse meat or dog meat, but not revolted by eating cow, pig,
or sheep meat, or chicken meat. People think of horses as pets, people
substitutes, while pigs, which are a heck of a sight brighter than
horses, are considered just a source of food. Are you realy happy abut
pork after seeing "Babe"?
Note: I'm not advocating being a vegetarian, just that people be aware
that animal flesh is animal flesh, and preferences aren't based on logic.
--
maiko covington
>Read the label on cat or dog food. It is a mixture of very low
>grade fish, fowl, or meat, with lots of starch and water. You could
>probably get much the same nourishment from four slices of bread,
>made into a tuna fish sandwhich with 49 cent a can tuna.
I buy that 49 cent a can tuna (from County Market, as a
matter of fact). I eat _lots_ of it, and more than a few times, the
bagger has made a comment to the effect that "wow, you sure do buy
a lot of cat food." Maybe people consider it almost the same thing?
I don't have a cat...
> Cat and dog food doesn't have to taste good, since cats and dogs,
>(in spite of the accounts of people with badly spoiled pets), will
>eat what is put in front of them. There are plenty of economical
>people food combinations. If you LIKE the taste of the stuff, go
>ahead, but it is pretty foolish.
As far as I can tell, cats actually prefer the taste of fish that's
"gone over" a bit. To THEM, the pet food grade stuff is probably tastier.
All the cats I've either known or owned could never pass up some old fish
heads mouldering in a bowl. Yummmmmm!
Maiko Covington
Roseanne Liska
never seen them get too sick from their food). I can't handle the smell of cat/dog
food, so I definately wouldn't consider eating it... but I am curious. :-)
--roseanne :-)
emailed and posted from misc.consumers.frugal-living
Steve wrote:
> dog and cat foods contain unhealthy level of germs/bacterias. So it's
> unsafe for human consumption.
>
> Steve
>
> On Fri, 25 Dec 1998 17:03:16 GMT, 70473...@compuserve.com wrote:
>
> >After seeing cans of the cheapest cat food on sale at my local supermarket for
> >less than 20 cents a can, I've decided it is about time for me to start eating
> >cat and dog food for half my nourishment in order to save money.
> >I need any advice on this way of dining. Which are the best brands, are most
> >nutritious for humans, cooking tips, etc. Any help would appreciated.
> >Thanks
> >
> >-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> >http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
--
Roseanne Liska @ Spectrum Computers
http://www.spectrum-computers.com
http://www.webcreations-va.com
mailto:rose...@spectrum-computers.com
Affordable Hardware, Networking, Web Hosting and Design
From the Desk of Toto: Hated Oz, Took the Shoes, Went Home!!
Roseanne Liska
expensive it is. I try to stick with "whole" foods... cut my grocery bill by
a lot. :-)
mark wrote:
> Is there anyone else here that thinks this is NOT a healthy alternative to
> save money??? Dog and cat food are made for dogs and cats!
>
> Save money by eliminating meat from your diet and shopping at low-cost
> grocery stores. Fill up on inexpensive rice/grains and ad vegetables and
> fruits as sides. It will be healthier and cheaper! Also eliminate all junk
> food.
>
> mark
--
ECox524338
Considering the fact that cats are really ruthless little carnivores, it
doesn't make sense that *lower-protein* is better for them. If a cat's eating
mice all day, he's not eating low-protein.
OTOH, one of my cats loves vegetables of most any kind, so I let her eat them.
Peas and broccoli are her faves.
The other cat loves graham crackers -- will rip your finger apart to get at
them -- I just can't explain that.
Rabbit
> of eating horse meat or dog meat, but not revolted by eating cow, pig,
> or sheep meat, or chicken meat. People think of horses as pets, people
> substitutes, while pigs, which are a heck of a sight brighter than
> horses, are considered just a source of food. Are you realy happy abut
> pork after seeing "Babe"?
> Note: I'm not advocating being a vegetarian, just that people be aware
> that animal flesh is animal flesh, and preferences aren't based on logic.
> --
Exactly. Many years ago when I lived in Toronto, there was a horsemeat
butcher (by law he wasn't allowed to sell any other type of meat, but he did
sell vegetables and canned food also). I bought it regularly. It was
cheaper than beef and had no fat on it at all. It was darker than beef and
looked like venison. It tasted like a cross between the two, a bit "gamier"
than beef but not as much as deer or moose. If I still ate meat, I'd buy it
again in a minute.
Rabbit
Rabbit
ECox524338 wrote:
> Considering the fact that cats are really ruthless little carnivores, it
> doesn't make sense that *lower-protein* is better for them. If a cat's eating
> mice all day, he's not eating low-protein.
>
Yes, but how long is he going to live? You don't often hear of cats in the wild
living to be 15 to 20 years old, but pets do.
Rabbit
Cheryl L Perkins
: I'm not vouching for this as the wisest possible choice, but DH has told me
: that (before I knew him) when he lived in Germany and was broke, really
: broke, he lived for a week on the equivalent of a 5 pound bag of sugar.
When I was totally broke, I ate spam (the real thing) spread with mustard,
and canned soups.
I later found out that beans and rice are also cheap, and far more
nutritious.
Cheryl
--
Cheryl Perkins
cper...@stemnet.nf.ca
Peter Rathmann
maiko covington wrote in message <76dr1e$2c7$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
>> Cat and dog food doesn't have to taste good, since cats and dogs,
>>(in spite of the accounts of people with badly spoiled pets), will
>>eat what is put in front of them. There are plenty of economical
>>people food combinations. If you LIKE the taste of the stuff, go
>>ahead, but it is pretty foolish.
>
> As far as I can tell, cats actually prefer the taste of fish that's
>"gone over" a bit. To THEM, the pet food grade stuff is probably tastier.
>All the cats I've either known or owned could never pass up some old fish
>heads mouldering in a bowl. Yummmmmm!
When we run out of canned cat food I sometimes substitute regular tuna fish.
Both our cats clearly prefer this to their regular cat food. In fact, one
of the cats normally only eats the dry cat food and ignores the canned food,
but she always comes running when the regular tuna is substituted.
Peter
Joseph Java
go to the grocery store and try to spend $5 on food. I bet you can
survive on this for a week An example:
$ 0.65 - 1 gallon of spring water
$.1.80 - 3 potatoes
$ 1.00 - 2 cans of tuna
$ 1.55 - loaf of whole-grain bread
-----------
$ 5.00 total
you would do better if you could add some fruits and some starch to
this. try that on the $10/week plan.
people in other countires sometimes have to subsist on very little,
and what they can get is often contaminated or of poor quality. you
can get perfectly good stuff at most grocers in most developed
countires for cheap. Its the luxuries that are expensive. No need to
treat oneself like an animal. You can get $5/week collecting cans if
you have to.
-JJ
r...@netcom.dot.com
salt".
Consumer's Reports recently rated pet food. One of the things they
checked was nutrition (if my memory serves me right). If we
assume the researchers at Consumers Union know what they're doing,
I sincerely doubt that commercial pet food is *so* bad. Some of
the companies do a lot of research on pet nutrition.
I've been feeding my cats canned cat food for a while now.
They're really healthy, sparkling coats, have never really gotten
sick (I take 'em to the vet every year for a checkup).
Just 'cos a diet is 'unnatural' does not make it unhealthy. Cats
who eat mice and birds can get worms which can make them quite
sick.
One of our cats was lost for 12 weeks. When she came back, she
had lost a ton of weight and had to be dewormed.
This cat is one of the smartest I've seen ; and is an excellent
mouser to boot. She didn't get in any fights and had no other
infections.
Proof that the natural diet isn't always a healthy one.
cheers
-- ronnie
Ken wrote:
: Those advocating eating pet food might do well to read what's at the
: following site. According to this site, pet food isn't even fit for
: pets. Why on earth are we told that table/human food is bad for pets
: when this stuff isn't? Could it be because those so advising have a
: vested interested in the sale of such foods?
: http://www.dnai.com/~dogslife/DONTS/DIETARYDONTS.html
--
mailto:r...@netcom.com ** PGP-encrypted mail accepted **
PGP public key available by finger. Key/ID #: 1024/F37FD7D1
PGPprint: 08 5A 4D 74 08 21 0F D0 CF AF 83 C0 5C 55 71 C0
Cheryl L Perkins
: Try this:
: go to the grocery store and try to spend $5 on food. I bet you can
: survive on this for a week An example:
: $ 0.65 - 1 gallon of spring water
: $.1.80 - 3 potatoes
: $ 1.00 - 2 cans of tuna
: $ 1.55 - loaf of whole-grain bread
: -----------
: $ 5.00 total
: you would do better if you could add some fruits and some starch to
: this. try that on the $10/week plan.
: people in other countires sometimes have to subsist on very little,
: and what they can get is often contaminated or of poor quality. you
: can get perfectly good stuff at most grocers in most developed
: countires for cheap. Its the luxuries that are expensive. No need to
: treat oneself like an animal. You can get $5/week collecting cans if
: you have to.
: -JJ
I wouldn't pay for water. It's generally been free, and safe. OK, in some
areas the free, safe water tastes really nasty, but you either drink it or
ask a neighbour for the location of the nearest spring.
$1.80 for three potatoes? US dollars??? Are those scarce, high-bred
potatoes? In my life, potatoes are pretty much the standard, cheap starch.
Yes, I've heard about the poor elderly sometimes needing pet food to
survive. Round here, they might boil up a nice pot of potatoes, cabbage,
turnip, and salt meat, that being a traditional food.
Oh, and I don't think it's very easy here to get $5 a week with cans. I
just dump mine at the collection place at work; the money goes to a
charity. It would take a LOT of cans, at the price they pay here, to make
up $5.
I'm being a bit flippant. Yes, there are malnourished elderly people.
Around here, they aren't usually short of the price of a potato. (I am
still aghast at the price for 3 potatoes!) They might be dependent on
relatives to take them to the store, or one of the organizations which
helps the elderly poor. And they are more likely to worry about money for
'the heat' or 'the light and power' than to buy catfood.
Cheryl
Cheryl Perkins
cper...@stemnet.nf.ca
Leigh R Hidell
> survive on this for a week An example:
> $ 0.65 - 1 gallon of spring water
> $.1.80 - 3 potatoes
> $ 1.00 - 2 cans of tuna
> $ 1.55 - loaf of whole-grain bread
> -----------
> $ 5.00 total
JJ, I think you meant 3 pounds of potatoes, based
on prices around here. I'll offer my own comments
on the $5.00 a week plan. First off, you must be
assuming an energy source, since potatoes can't
be eaten raw. I'm going to say, blow off the
spring water, and solarize your water in a solar
cooker with scrounged parts. Next, I can often
get 10 pounds of potatoes for $1.80.
I can surely get five pounds. I'm not sure
I would bother w/ the whole-grain bread. You
are duplicating functions here -- I think you
need more fat calories rather than another
carbohydrate. The tuna, again, has a dab of
protein but it's low in fat. Keep in mind that
when you are hungry, the immediate threat to
life is starvation --lack of calories. You need
to get a fat in there somehow, & I'm afraid
the only way to do it under your price restrictions
might be to jettison the bread & get the cheapest
hunk of cheese you can get. Now you can scrounge
a bit of vitamin C by making pine needle tea
or (in better weather) looking for wild mint or
other greens. If you can't get any greens, however, I'd
definitely grab a head of cabbage. When carrots
are 20 to 25 cents a pound, grab some of them too.
Hmmm...
Now I've got
5 pounds of potatoes at 1.80
2 cans of tuna at $1.00
8 oz. of cheapie cheddar for $1.50
1 pound cabbage at 25 cents
2 pound bag carrots at 49 cents
Oops, I'm four cents over! But yeah I agree you can
eat by checking all the change return boxes at
the mall...I won't say it's gourmet, but you can
even have some pretty decent meals -- dice cabbage
and carrot together for a salad, melt cheese
on top of the potatoes, etc.
Actually, I could do a lot more at home
w/ that price restriction, because I can buy
grain in bulk, garden for next to nothing, etc.
but ironically the homeowner has a real edge
over the homeless or nearly destitute person
when it comes to preparing cheap food.
In times when I have NO money for food, it's
no problem, because the pantry is there to
provide....
Anyway, it's an interesting game. Anybody else
want to play?
Good luck, Leigh
gadd...@ptialaska.net
>> survive on this for a week An example:
>> $ 0.65 - 1 gallon of spring water
>> $.1.80 - 3 potatoes
>> $ 1.00 - 2 cans of tuna
>> $ 1.55 - loaf of whole-grain bread
>> -----------
>> $ 5.00 total
>
>Hmmm...
>Now I've got
> 5 pounds of potatoes at 1.80
> 2 cans of tuna at $1.00
> 8 oz. of cheapie cheddar for $1.50
> 1 pound cabbage at 25 cents
> 2 pound bag carrots at 49 cents
>In times when I have NO money for food, it's
>no problem, because the pantry is there to
>provide....
>Anyway, it's an interesting game. Anybody else
>want to play?
>
>Good luck, Leigh
I'll play. And remember, these are Kodiak, Alaska, prices, BTW:
(List also assumes energy source and place to cook.)
22-oz. pkg pasta @ .69
28-oz. can crushed tomatoes @ .99
2-lb. bag pinto beans @ $1.19
1 doz. eggs @ 1.09
4 cans spinach @ 1.00
TOTAL $4.96
I, too, could round this out rather sumptuously from my
pantry.
Just for fun, here's what Leigh's list would cost here, based
on my last shopping trip and the flier from today's paper:
5 lbs potatoes @ 3.89
2 (small) cans of tuna @ 1.58
8 oz. cheddar @ 2.59
1 lb cabbage @ .69
2-lb bag carrots @ 1.89
TOTAL $10.64
Pretty amazing, huh?
Jennifer
-----------------------------------
He's dead, Jim. You grab his wallet; I'll get his tricorder.
Ann Mcmanus
From the grocery circular that was in Sunday's paper:
10 pounds of potatoes .99
2 cans tuna in water .98
2 pound cabbage .38
hearty wheat bread .89
macaroni (2 boxes) 1.00
26 oz. jar spaghetti sauce .83
_____________
$5.07
In northeastern PA
Of course, the pantry has lots of stuff in it. If I were really limited
to $5, I'd probably buy the potatoes and some stuff for salads. Chicken
leg/thigh parts are on sale at .49/lb.The rest (tomatoes, pasta, tuna,
etc.) I'd fetch from the pantry and we'd dine, if not like royalty, at
least like well fed peasants!
Ann
>>Hmmm...
>>Now I've got
5 pounds of potatoes at 1.80
2 cans of tuna at $1.00
8 oz. of cheapie cheddar for $1.50
1 pound cabbage at 25 cents
2 pound bag carrots at 49 cents
>>In times when I have NO money for food, it's no problem, because the
pantry is there to provide....
>>Anyway, it's an interesting game. Anybody else want to play?
>>
>>Good luck, Leigh
>
>I'll play. And remember, these are Kodiak, Alaska, prices, BTW:
>(List also assumes energy source and place to cook.)
>
>22-oz. pkg pasta @ .69
>28-oz. can crushed tomatoes @ .99
>2-lb. bag pinto beans @ $1.19
>1 doz. eggs @ 1.09
>4 cans spinach @ 1.00
>TOTAL $4.96
>
>I, too, could round this out rather sumptuously from my
>pantry.
>
>
Anthony Matonak
>
> Over there in misc.survivalism, we were having a great thread about just
> eating the cats and dogs after the sugar hits the fan (if you believe it
> will) on/after 01/01/2000
>
> The usual train of thought is to grab strays that are roaming the
> countryside. Whreas others think that it's worth the effort to dognap 'em
> coming out of a pet-grooming joint in a tony suburb. The ratiomale is,
> these dogs are getting better groomings than the yuppies' own parents ar
> out there in the medicare-mill nursing homes. And thus, the resulting meat
> will be sort of analogous to Kobe beef.
>
> --
> Alan Horowitz al...@widomaker.com
I don't know about the meat tasting better but there is a good
rational for napping them rather than nabbing strays. Simply put
strays are more likely to have picked up diseases that well
cared for pets won't have. If the thing looks unwell in any way
you're better off going hungry than getting sick eating it.
No matter the source, cook it well just in case.
Personally, when the sugar hits the fan, I'd be more worried about
packs of wild dogs hunting me down and eating me than the other
way around.
Anthony Matonak
>
> > dog and cat foods contain unhealthy level of germs/bacterias. So it's
> > unsafe for human consumption.
> >
> > Steve
> >
I can't quote chapter and ordinance here but I believe in the United
States
of America that all pet food has meet the criteria for human
consumption.
That being the case, they do not contain any more unhealthy levels of
germs/bacteria than other food packaged for people to eat.
On the other hand, I have seen 'processed meat product' and other such
things sold for people to eat that I wouldn't feed my dog.
Dr. Ram Samudrala
burritos. They're like 39 cents each and you can have ten of them in a
day and completely fill yourself. Need a microwave though. (:
--Ram
email@urls || http://www.ram.org || http://www.twisted-helices.com/th
"Isn't it ironic that Alanis Morisette's song has little of it?"
---M. Perotto
Leigh R Hidell
> Just for fun, here's what Leigh's list would cost here, based
> on my last shopping trip and the flier from today's paper:
> 5 lbs potatoes @ 3.89
> 2 (small) cans of tuna @ 1.58
> 8 oz. cheddar @ 2.59
> 1 lb cabbage @ .69
> 2-lb bag carrots @ 1.89
> TOTAL $10.64
Holy cow, Jennifer!!!! Good luck, Leigh
Deborah Stevenson
>Try this:
> go to the grocery store and try to spend $5 on food. I bet you can
>survive on this for a week An example:
>$ 0.65 - 1 gallon of spring water
>$.1.80 - 3 potatoes
>$ 1.00 - 2 cans of tuna
>$ 1.55 - loaf of whole-grain bread
>-----------
>$ 5.00 total
Uh-huh. For a generous 300 and some calories per day, when your basic
adult woman's maintenance needs start at 1600. Then note that you've got
at best 1/3 of your various other nutritional needs filled (more like 1/5
for the more crucial stuff). Then go job-hunting on the stuff and see how
impressed prospective employers are by the pellagra lesions and your
anemia-induced fainting spells. On the bright side, you're probably too
old for marasmus :-).
Deborah Stevenson
(stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Richie Rich
gadd...@ptialaska.net
worth of groceries, given an income shortfall. No one was saying that the food
would be adequate over the long haul. We were talking strictly emergency stuff.
Jennifer
JBQUILTOK
>i've
>never seen them get too sick from their food).
My babies have left plenty of second hand cat food around for me to clean up.
Janet
Deborah Stevenson
>However, the thread was asking if folks could buy enough merely to survive on $5
>worth of groceries, given an income shortfall. No one was saying that the food
>would be adequate over the long haul. We were talking strictly emergency stuff.
And judging by the first example the answer is "no." It's not even a
question of long-haul minor deficiencies--that's below starvation rations
to get through a day.
Deborah Stevenson
(stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Dawn
Stevenson) wrote:
Yes, but how long would it take someone to actually starve on this
diet? We're not talking forever or even a long time.
Dawn, who hopes it never comes to pass that she eat like this.
Dave & Roo
that it is not only beef, chicken, or fish that ends up in dogfood and
catfood? Some companies actually buy animals that have been
euthanized at animal shelters and use them in their product (i.e. cats
and dogs). I know this sounds too awful to be true, but I have also
heard this reported elsewhere. They usually list the ingredient as
something like "animal byproduct".
Deborah Stevenson
>On 3 Jan 1999 15:22:44 GMT, stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Deborah
>Stevenson) wrote:
>>In <76mq4l$j...@drn.newsguy.com> gadd...@ptialaska.net writes:
>>
>>>However, the thread was asking if folks could buy enough merely to survive on $5
>>>worth of groceries, given an income shortfall. No one was saying that the food
>>>would be adequate over the long haul. We were talking strictly emergency stuff.
>>
>>And judging by the first example the answer is "no." It's not even a
>>question of long-haul minor deficiencies--that's below starvation rations
>>to get through a day.
>Yes, but how long would it take someone to actually starve on this
>diet? We're not talking forever or even a long time.
Makes as much sense to say you could get by spending nothing on food,
then, since you wouldn't starve immediately. Or just buy one
potato a week, since you wouldn't starve quite as quickly. There's an
obvious comparison to the situation proposed, but it would bring on
Godwin's Law :-).
If this is about how one can genuinely subsist on $10 worth of food a
week, you have to come up with genuine subsistence rations. The post
didn't.
Deborah Stevenson
(stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Dawn
Stevenson) wrote:
>If this is about how one can genuinely subsist on $10 worth of food a
>week, you have to come up with genuine subsistence rations. The post
>didn't.
Yes, but I could survive for one week on $10. And that was my point.
Dawn, who won't do it unless necessary.
Leigh R Hidell
> >And judging by the first example the answer is "no." It's not even a
> >question of long-haul minor deficiencies--that's below starvation rations
> >to get through a day.
Deborah, the first example contained a misprint. It
was surely not 3 potatoes but 3 pounds of potatoes
for $1.80. At any rate, one of the stores in my
area this week is offering 10 pounds of potatoes for
$0.98. Now, if *I* had zero dollars to spend this
week on food, much less five dollars, I assure
you that I would not only not starve, I would eat
well...because of buying grain in bulk, having
my winter greens in the backyard, etc. I could keep
going at $5 a week for at least a year....
But, as I said in my previous post, I'm a homeowner,
have land for that garden, a place to store the bulk
grains, etc.
In actual point of fact, homeless people will spend
more than $5 a week for food, because they can't
store up and get the bargains. A friend of mine who
used to live in McCarran Airport spent about $3 a day
on food. He ate nachoes, which is the cheapest
high fat fast food. (Remember, fat is good if you're
in danger of starving!) His source of cash was
returning luggage carts that people left for the
25 cent deposit, and he said that his expected earnings
were a bit over $1 an hour, so starvation was not
really a problem. There are many bad things to be
said about this lifestyle, but he lived like this
for a long time & didn't die or develop any kind of
nutritional deficiency. Good luck, Leigh
Peter Rathmann
The approximate rule of thumb that I was taught is that you can survive:
3 minutes without air
3 days without water
3 weeks without food.
So if the question is just how little you can spend on food for a week then
the correct answer is $0 since air and water are readily available most
places free of charge.
Deborah Stevenson
>On 3 Jan 1999 22:24:36 GMT, stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Deborah
>Stevenson) wrote:
>>If this is about how one can genuinely subsist on $10 worth of food a
>>week, you have to come up with genuine subsistence rations. The post
>>didn't.
>Yes, but I could survive for one week on $10. And that was my point.
Then you could also survive for a week on no dollars, given a water
supply. Neither possibility is within the realm of viable subsistence,
merely avoiding death.
Deborah Stevenson
(stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Deborah Stevenson
>> >And judging by the first example the answer is "no." It's not even a
>> >question of long-haul minor deficiencies--that's below starvation rations
>> >to get through a day.
>> >Deborah Stevenson
>Deborah, the first example contained a misprint. It
>was surely not 3 potatoes but 3 pounds of potatoes
>for $1.80.
I'll accept that, but even if you double the potatoes (which around here
would be generous) you're still only getting about 500 calories a day. It
won't do you if you have to actually get out of bed ;-).
>At any rate, one of the stores in my
>area this week is offering 10 pounds of potatoes for
>$0.98.
I haven't been able to plow through the snow to the store this week :-).
However, I was mainly troubled by the idea that having food to eat every
day of the week counted as an actual subsistence ration, when it's a bit
more complicated than that; awareness of that complication didn't seem to
be reflected in the shopping list.
>Now, if *I* had zero dollars to spend this
>week on food, much less five dollars, I assure
>you that I would not only not starve, I would eat
>well...because of buying grain in bulk, having
>my winter greens in the backyard, etc. I could keep
>going at $5 a week for at least a year....
>But, as I said in my previous post, I'm a homeowner,
>have land for that garden, a place to store the bulk
>grains, etc.
Yup. Basically us housed folk have the overhead and preparation paid for
already, whereas the homeless pretty much have to cover it with every bit
of food they buy. Therefore, as you note, the cheaper budget most of us
could manage isn't available to them. It would also be a heck of a lot
easier for us to benefit from government programs designed to make sure we
*didn't* just have 300 calories a day.
Deborah Stevenson
(stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
vic...@hotmail.com
70473...@compuserve.com wrote:
> After seeing cans of the cheapest cat food on sale at my local supermarket for
> less than 20 cents a can, I've decided it is about time for me to start eating
> cat and dog food for half my nourishment in order to save money.
> I need any advice on this way of dining. Which are the best brands, are most
> nutritious for humans, cooking tips, etc. Any help would appreciated.
> Thanks
Well after chuckling a bit at some of the responses given the answer to your
question is simple. DON'T eat DOG food. You stated earlier back that it cost
"less then 20 cents for a can" of dog food. Instead of spending .20 cents on a
can of DOG/CAT food, why not go over to your local Walmart and buy Ramen
Noodles. They cost about $.05-.10 each. This means if you make a nice bowl of
Ramen soup, you will spend around .10 (2 packets).
Also perhaps you haven't taken this in consideration as well, but DOG's and
CAT's are not very picky eaters. All animal food companies know this fact,
and therefore use LOW grade meat, i use the term MEAT very loosely. This
means the quality of meat you will be eating is very poor, and also
incrediably un-healthy. *(This assumes that lowgrade meat is full of
HIGH_FAT, CholestroL, just to name a few )* Another valuable point is Dog's
and Cat's have a very high immune system. There body can take lots of
bacteria that would kill us in days. You can fight back against this by
really well-cooking, but remember that still leaves you to another field of
chemical perservatives. The FDA doesn't go through Dog/CAT Food to make sure
they are safe for human consumption. Therefore, a lot of chemicals banned in
Human products are put in animals food instead. If you still think this is
somewhat bs, don't take my advice and pay excessive doctor bills! (Trust me
they can go pretty high, so high infact that it would equal if not overflow
the amount you would have spent if you ate out at a nice classy restaruant
everday)
As a college student, I have lived on these puppies(no pun) for almost 1
semester now, and with a variety of flavors I honestly believe you can't go
WRONG. They got Chick, Fish, Beef, Cheese, Pork, just to name a few with
spices to fit the occasion. Perhaps a couple vegatables or fruits should be
eaten along with this meal. After all you want to have somewhat of a balanced
diet.
I guess what comes to mind here is, its good to be frugal but somethings are
best not be done in that manor. Health I honestly believe is one.
So I encourage you to take my advice and not resort to this type of de-menial
behavior. If you want to save money, take less showers, or just visit your
local homeless shelter. As a volunteer I see all sorts of people, and you
won't be excluded in anyway. You get a nice plate of food, a shower, and
place to stay.
Comments -> Best when e-mailed vic...@hotmail.com
--
I am the lord of the Dance
cle...@westminster.ac.uk
I think that the original list was a bit inaccurate. In the
UK, while I don't do this myself, there are basic foodstuffs
that are quite cheap.
Cans of beans and spaghetti hoops can be bought for about
9p (about US$0.14c). I buy cans of chick peas at 2 pounds
for 12 cans (US$3.00 for 12 cans), and places such as
Aldi sell differing types of beans for similar prices.
Large Indian supply shops sometimes sell broken rice
in bulk amounts extremely cheaply.
Most large supermarkets do loss-leader flour, which is
useful, e.g. 1.5 kgs (about three pounds) of
flour, again for 9p. Flour is about 10% protein by weight,
and includes carbohydrates for energy, and would balance
the protein in the beans. When baking, unspecified salad
oil (cheap in bulk) can be used in place of more expensive
butter or margarine in some recipes. Potatoes can be very
cheap if you buy the (ugly) value packs from large
supermarkets, about 10p, 0.15c / pound. I bought some from
a market recently which were 6pounds for one quid (US$1.50),
which were quite good, if unwashed. Large vegetable markets
(such as Berwick Street in London) are a good place to go
just at closing time, when the sellers will often sell
quite large tubs of fruit/veggies for low prices.
Loss-leader bread can be 18p for a regular sized loaf,
which can accompany several meals, etc, etc, etc.
Given a multivitamin pill can cost about 10p (US$ 0.15), I
wouldn't be surprised if an adequate, though unexciting
diet could be created for US$2.00 per day, though I haven't
got the time to go through and do all the sums.
By comparison to pet food, regular human food can be
cheap.
Not that I eat like this myself (oh all right then, I'll
admit to buying lots of the cheap flour :-) )
Cheers,
Ross-c
Leigh R Hidell
> I'll accept that, but even if you double the potatoes (which around here
> would be generous) you're still only getting about 500 calories a day. It
> won't do you if you have to actually get out of bed ;-).
Deborah, another suggestion was put forward which I intend
to try & report back how it works out, when I get a chance.
In e-mail, I was informed that you can get beef fat
trimmings from many grocery store butchers
for free. (Look respectable & say it's for your dog.)
Then, when you fry the potatoes in fat, you have just
added a lot more calories. This can't be any worse
than the awful fake cheese on those nachoes my friend
ate in the airport, and it might even taste good.
> I haven't been able to plow through the snow to the store this week :-).
> However, I was mainly troubled by the idea that having food to eat every
> day of the week counted as an actual subsistence ration, when it's a bit
> more complicated than that; awareness of that complication didn't seem to
> be reflected in the shopping list.
The original shopping list, and I think we're in
agreement on this, was WAY too low in fat.
When you're starving, the spring water should
be chucked in favor of water out of the fountain
& people should be looking for ways to add
fat as it's the most concentrated form of calories.
Also, once you lose your ability to digest fat
easily, it becomes more difficult to eat fat
later, when food becomes available. (You throw up,
at least that's what I learned from some ill-advised
experiments w/ Pritikin, if any of ya'll remember
back to the seventies...!)
I think we share very similar concerns w/ the
original shopping list.
> Yup. Basically us housed folk have the overhead and preparation paid for
> already, whereas the homeless pretty much have to cover it with every bit
> of food they buy. Therefore, as you note, the cheaper budget most of us
> could manage isn't available to them. It would also be a heck of a lot
> easier for us to benefit from government programs designed to make sure we
> *didn't* just have 300 calories a day.
Agreed. Good luck, Leigh
ECox524338
In article <368AA1DB...@hotstar.net>, Rabbit <rab...@hotstar.net> writes:
>Yes, but how long is he going to live? You don't often hear of cats in the
>wild
>living to be 15 to 20 years old, but pets do.
>
>Rabbit
>
>
But I doubt that's a nutritional thing. ALL animals (with the possible
exception of marine mammals) live longer in captivity because there's a
guaranteed food source, no predators, and no competition from other members of
their species for food.
Chloe
:Deborah, another suggestion was put forward which I intend
:to try & report back how it works out, when I get a chance.
:In e-mail, I was informed that you can get beef fat
:trimmings from many grocery store butchers
:for free. (Look respectable & say it's for your dog.)
:Then, when you fry the potatoes in fat, you have just
:added a lot more calories. This can't be any worse
:than the awful fake cheese on those nachoes my friend
:ate in the airport, and it might even taste good.
It probably *would* taste good (of course, I have to stop myself at one bite
or I'll eat all the fat on a piece of prime rib or steak). Just like it's
tasty to slice onions and fry them in the grease left over after you cook
hamburgers.
Although it sounds frugal, I wouldn't do this if cholesterol is a concern,
however. Then again, ever notice all the people who say their grandparents
lived into their 90s despite eating gobs and gobs of animal fat their whole
lives?
Leigh R Hidell
> Although it sounds frugal, I wouldn't do this if cholesterol is a concern,
> however. Then again, ever notice all the people who say their grandparents
> lived into their 90s despite eating gobs and gobs of animal fat their whole
> lives?
Wait. This was a starvation, emergency suggestion only.
Cholesterol is not a concern over a week's time.
The thought problem put forward, remember, was the
guy had only $5 to spend on a week's worth of food.
He ain't gonna get heart disease & die in a week.
Good luck, Leigh
Chloe
I'm not sure it's a terrible idea even long-term, but short-term it makes a
*lot* of sense.
Back to regularly scheduled programming <g>.
Leigh R Hidell wrote in message <76tqno$7...@junkie.gnofn.org>...
:
:
:> Although it sounds frugal, I wouldn't do this if cholesterol is a
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Rivahcat2
shelters and use them in their product (i.e. cats and dogs). I know this
sounds too awful to be true, but I have also heard this reported elsewhere.
They usually list the ingredient as something like "animal byproduct".>>
Oh, for heaven's sake. This sounds like an urban legend in full bloom. Don't
you know that Dateline and its competetive shows are nothing but yellow
journalism (read: tabloid television)?
Just cause they say it on TV don't make it so.
--
D. H. Lewis >^..^<
"What does not kill me, makes me stronger."
Un-com"plicate" my email address to contact me. ;)
Bev
>
> <<Some companies actually buy animals that have been euthanized at animal
> shelters and use them in their product (i.e. cats and dogs). I know this
> sounds too awful to be true, but I have also heard this reported elsewhere.
> They usually list the ingredient as something like "animal byproduct".>>
>
> Oh, for heaven's sake. This sounds like an urban legend in full bloom. Don't
> you know that Dateline and its competetive shows are nothing but yellow
> journalism (read: tabloid television)?
>
> Just cause they say it on TV don't make it so.
Real shame. Seems like a perfect solution to the pet-overpopulation
problem.
--
Cheers,
Bev
------------------------------------------------------
"Don't bother looking for that key. There is no Esc."
-- M. Tabnik
Elaine Gallegos
rice and dried beans. This is supplemented with tortillas,lard and
hot peppers. That's it. The whole story. They don't appear to crave much
in the way of variety. Occasionally, they might get a few slivers of meat
to put into the tacos. Can't picture this diet running much more than
maybe 25cents or so a day. They sure as heck wouldn't spend a buck on
spring water.
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu) wrote:
: In <368bc416....@newsreader.digex.net> be...@nycap.rr.com (Joseph Java) writes:
: >Try this:
: > go to the grocery store and try to spend $5 on food. I bet you can
: >survive on this for a week An example:
: >$ 0.65 - 1 gallon of spring water
: >$.1.80 - 3 potatoes
: >$ 1.00 - 2 cans of tuna
: >$ 1.55 - loaf of whole-grain bread
: >-----------
: >$ 5.00 total
: Uh-huh. For a generous 300 and some calories per day, when your basic
: adult woman's maintenance needs start at 1600. Then note that you've got
: at best 1/3 of your various other nutritional needs filled (more like 1/5
: for the more crucial stuff). Then go job-hunting on the stuff and see how
Elaine Gallegos
For real savings, forget about cans completely. Grains and beans in bulk
is the cheapest way to get them.
cle...@westminster.ac.uk wrote:
: In article <76pfl2$pq5$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>,
Elaine Gallegos
whole wheat flatbread. Nothing in it but flour,water and salt. Sprouted
alphafa and lentils, a little cheese on the flatbread. The sprouts
represented the vegetables.
Flatbread cooks quickly and could be cooked on a campfire if one lost
their electricity. This is another diet that might run no more than
50cents a day, tops.
gadd...@ptialaska.net wrote:
: However, the thread was asking if folks could buy enough merely to survive on $5
: worth of groceries, given an income shortfall. No one was saying that the food
: would be adequate over the long haul. We were talking strictly emergency stuff.
: Jennifer
: >
: >
Elaine Gallegos
even experience much hunger. The MIGHT even get healthier. No lard. No
refined sugar, no coffee.
Sprouts are very nutritious. They are a living food, and will be the
freshest thing that most of us ever eat. Sprouts provide vitamins and
minerals in addition to protien, carbohydrates and roughage.
Dawn (lin...@hotmail.com) wrote:
: On 3 Jan 1999 15:22:44 GMT, stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Deborah
: Stevenson) wrote:
: >In <76mq4l$j...@drn.newsguy.com> gadd...@ptialaska.net writes:
: >
: >>However, the thread was asking if folks could buy enough merely to survive on $5
: >>worth of groceries, given an income shortfall. No one was saying that the food
: >>would be adequate over the long haul. We were talking strictly emergency stuff.
: >
: >And judging by the first example the answer is "no." It's not even a
: >question of long-haul minor deficiencies--that's below starvation rations
: >to get through a day.
: >
: >Deborah Stevenson
: >(stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
: Yes, but how long would it take someone to actually starve on this
: diet? We're not talking forever or even a long time.
: Dawn, who hopes it never comes to pass that she eat like this.
Elaine Gallegos
much of them still goes into pet food. They're just more discrete about
it. Classically, dead pets are also burned. The ash is said to be a good
fertilizer.
Bev (bas...@ktb.net) wrote:
Elaine Gallegos
: <<Some companies actually buy animals that have been euthanized at animal
: shelters and use them in their product (i.e. cats and dogs). I know this
: sounds too awful to be true, but I have also heard this reported elsewhere.
: They usually list the ingredient as something like "animal byproduct".>>
: Oh, for heaven's sake. This sounds like an urban legend in full bloom.
It's quite true. But think about it- those animals are dead anyway. Is
it better to actually use them for something, or to throw them away?
Purina used to admit to using dead dogs and cats in their food. They got
exposed for doing it, and now claim that they don't do that. Who knows? It
would make more economic sense for them to simply pay off anyone who
wanted to write about it.
Elaine Gallegos
their dishes. Lard is cheap, and really adds the calories. Most Mexicans
are fat. Their food is very economical, but they sure aren't starving.
Leigh R Hidell (lr...@gnofn.org) wrote:
: > I'll accept that, but even if you double the potatoes (which around here
: > would be generous) you're still only getting about 500 calories a day. It
: > won't do you if you have to actually get out of bed ;-).
: Deborah, another suggestion was put forward which I intend
: to try & report back how it works out, when I get a chance.
: In e-mail, I was informed that you can get beef fat
: trimmings from many grocery store butchers
: for free. (Look respectable & say it's for your dog.)
: Then, when you fry the potatoes in fat, you have just
: added a lot more calories. This can't be any worse
: than the awful fake cheese on those nachoes my friend
: ate in the airport, and it might even taste good.
: > I haven't been able to plow through the snow to the store this week :-).
Cindy Bolinger
They have the same brands, same variety, same vegetables, same meats (though
cut a little differently from US cuts), same breads, same fruits, same junk
food, same drinks. I think your remark was a big racist.
Elaine Gallegos wrote in message <7736b6$ms$3...@haus.efn.org>...
Syn
don't have the first clue as to what you are talking about. As a Mexican
American, I find your little comment to be both racist and stupid. A little
advice from a Mexican...Think...than speak {or type out}, your mind. You'll
be glad you did. :-)
Elaine Gallegos wrote in message <7736b6$ms$3...@haus.efn.org>...
> The Mexicans spend very little on food. They get the 50lb sacks of white
>rice and dried beans. This is supplemented with tortillas,lard and
>hot peppers. That's it. The whole story. They don't appear to crave much
>in the way of variety. Occasionally, they might get a few slivers of meat
>to put into the tacos. Can't picture this diet running much more than
>maybe 25cents or so a day. They sure as heck wouldn't spend a buck on
>spring water.
>
>
>: In <368bc416....@newsreader.digex.net> be...@nycap.rr.com (Joseph
Java) writes:
>
>: >Try this:
>: > go to the grocery store and try to spend $5 on food. I bet you can
>: >survive on this for a week An example:
>: >$ 0.65 - 1 gallon of spring water
>: >$.1.80 - 3 potatoes
>: >$ 1.00 - 2 cans of tuna
>: >$ 1.55 - loaf of whole-grain bread
>: >$ 5.00 total
>
>: Uh-huh. For a generous 300 and some calories per day, when your basic
>: adult woman's maintenance needs start at 1600. Then note that you've got
>: at best 1/3 of your various other nutritional needs filled (more like 1/5
Syn
Cindy Bolinger wrote in message <775d2n$h6l$1...@allele.utmb.edu>...
>This is assuming a lot. Have you shopped in the supermarkets in Mexico?
>They have the same brands, same variety, same vegetables, same meats
(though
>cut a little differently from US cuts), same breads, same fruits, same junk
>food, same drinks. I think your remark was a big racist.
>
Alison Seitz
> > shelters and use them in their product (i.e. cats and dogs). I know this
> > sounds too awful to be true, but I have also heard this reported elsewhere.
> > They usually list the ingredient as something like "animal byproduct".>>
> >
>
> Real shame. Seems like a perfect solution to the pet-overpopulation
> problem.
No, it is not the perfect solution. Most animals are not supposed to eat other
members of their own species. As I recall, that's how whole mad-cow disease
started--cattle feed was sprinkled with bone-meal (from cows) as a vitamin or
something, and that caused mad-cow disease. Some other dread disease could be
caused by having dogs and cats eat members of their own species, too.
Now, if you want to grind them up into glue, or something, I don't have a problem
with that. Also, many other cultures consider dogs as "meat," so what would be
wrong with donating about-to-be-euthanized animals to those willing to use them for
food? Solves two problems at once.
Bev
>
> > > <<Some companies actually buy animals that have been euthanized at animal
> > > shelters and use them in their product (i.e. cats and dogs). I know this
> > > sounds too awful to be true, but I have also heard this reported elsewhere.
> > > They usually list the ingredient as something like "animal byproduct".>>
> > >
> > > Just cause they say it on TV don't make it so.
> >
> > Real shame. Seems like a perfect solution to the pet-overpopulation
> > problem.
>
> No, it is not the perfect solution. Most animals are not supposed to eat other
> members of their own species.
You actually think that a starving dog will turn up his nose at a nice
plate of fried poodle? What REALLY happens when your cat doesn't come
home? When a vulture dies, who do you think gets first pick?
> As I recall, that's how whole mad-cow disease
> started--cattle feed was sprinkled with bone-meal (from cows) as a vitamin or
> something, and that caused mad-cow disease. Some other dread disease could be
> caused by having dogs and cats eat members of their own species, too.
I think it was sheep scraps (most especially nerve tissue, brain, etc.), as
added protein for cattle feed. Cooking doesn't kill the....THING...that
causes it (can't remember the name, sorry, too many hot dogs...) because
it's not really alive. It may be noted that similar diseases are noticed
in tribes who ritually honor their dead relatives/enemies by eating them,
including their brains.
--
Cheers,
Bev
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
That's my opinion. Ought to be yours.
Cheryl L Perkins
: No, it is not the perfect solution. Most animals are not supposed to eat other
: members of their own species. As I recall, that's how whole mad-cow disease
: started--cattle feed was sprinkled with bone-meal (from cows) as a vitamin or
: something, and that caused mad-cow disease. Some other dread disease could be
: caused by having dogs and cats eat members of their own species, too.
(snip)
From diseased sheep. Cows normally don't eat either other cows or sheep,
but I believe the BSE was traced to a disease (scrapie) normally found in
sheep but transmitted to the cows by diseased sheep brain and spinal
tissue added to their feed.
Actually, some animals do engage in eating members of their own species.
There's been some debate as to whether the human disease kuru (sp?) really
was caused by ritual human cannibalism of diseased brains, as was once
thought. I don't recall hearing of cases in other species in which
cannibalism, itself (as opposed to eating diseased members of the species)
causes disease.
Cheryl.
--
Cheryl Perkins
cper...@stemnet.nf.ca
Roger P Williams
> You actually think that a starving dog will turn up his nose at a nice
> plate of fried poodle? What REALLY happens when your cat doesn't come
> home? When a vulture dies, who do you think gets first pick?
Vultures are uniquely adapted to eat things other animals can't eat. For
example, their digestive systems can deal with botulism. Other predators
generally won't eat vultures. I don't know whether vultures practice
cannibalism but most other macrofauna don't.
> I think it was sheep scraps (most especially nerve tissue, brain, etc.), as
> added protein for cattle feed. Cooking doesn't kill the....THING...that
> causes it (can't remember the name, sorry, too many hot dogs...) because
> it's not really alive.
Prions. Similar to viruses, but they do not have DNA. Their existence
was hypothesized for years and scrapie/MCD was the first proof that "life"
was possible without DNA. Some researchers believe that all living things
may have used protein instead of DNA for a long period of time until the
"invention" of DNA for genetic material conferred such great advantages
that the DNA-based life forms ate all the others. Unfortunately, the
fossil record doesn't tell you what type of genetic material a cell used,
so we can't be sure about this, but I personally have a sneaking suspicion
that DNA may have been the cause of the Cambrian Explosion.
> It may be noted that similar diseases are noticed
> in tribes who ritually honor their dead relatives/enemies by eating them,
> including their brains.
As someone else pointed out, Kuru. Contrary to what they indicated I
think it is considered pretty well proven that Kuru is transmitted by
nervous tissue cannibalism.
--Roger
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What will people of the future think of us? Will they say, as
Roger Williams said of some of the Massachusetts Indians, that
we were wolves with the minds of men? That we resigned our humanity?
They will have the right. -- C.P. Snow
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rabbit
> > problem.
>
> members of their own species. As I recall, that's how whole mad-cow disease
Remember, though, that cats and dogs are carnivores, and cows are herbivores. Cows
aren't meant to eat animals, but cats and dogs are.
Rabbit
Rabbit
>
> Now, if you want to grind them up into glue, or something, I don't have a problem
> with that. Also, many other cultures consider dogs as "meat," so what would be
> wrong with donating about-to-be-euthanized animals to those willing to use them for
> food? Solves two problems at once.
There's the obvious question of why the animal is being euthanized. If it's because
the pound is overfilled, and the animals are healthy, then I personally don't see a
problem with it -- except that, eventually, it will become a business, and then people
will be overbreeding animals in appalling conditions simply to sell them as food.
Rabbit
the tree by the river
Roger P Williams <rp...@gnofn.org> wrote:
>Bev <bas...@ktb.net> wrote:
>
>> I think it was sheep scraps (most especially nerve tissue, brain, etc.), as
>> added protein for cattle feed. Cooking doesn't kill the....THING...that
>> causes it (can't remember the name, sorry, too many hot dogs...) because
>> it's not really alive.
>
>Prions. Similar to viruses, but they do not have DNA. Their existence
>was hypothesized for years and scrapie/MCD was the first proof that "life"
>was possible without DNA.
Well, I'm not sure if prions (conformational variants of functional
proteins which are biologically inactive but can catalyze the
transformation of the functional version into its inactive one)
count as "alive." You can relate the process to other structural
autocatalytic processes in nonliving systems--this just happens to
occur within a living system. (And the infectious agent is resistant
to cooking because the temperature required to denature it is higher
than a lot of other proteins, but if you heated it up high enough it
would eventually be deactivated.)
Retroviruses are certainly more "life-like" than prions and do not
contain DNA; they've been known about a lot longer. (They do contain
RNA, however.)
> Some researchers believe that all living things
>may have used protein instead of DNA for a long period of time until the
>"invention" of DNA for genetic material conferred such great advantages
>that the DNA-based life forms ate all the others.
Possibly, though given the ability of RNA to act as an enzyme itself,
the "RNA world" model would seem much better supported as a predecessor
to the DNA-based regime (and before that, we've got various types of
unconstrained autocatalytic systems and the Cairnes-Smith "clay world"
hypothesis).
> Unfortunately, the
>fossil record doesn't tell you what type of genetic material a cell used,
>so we can't be sure about this, but I personally have a sneaking suspicion
>that DNA may have been the cause of the Cambrian Explosion.
I can think of no possible way to make such a hypothesis compatible
with either the evidence from molecular biology or the fossil record.
--
Soc.singles FAQ: < http://www.trygve.com/ssfaq.html > || "A minor setback..."
Personal webpage: < http://www.trygve.com > || -- Evil the Cat
Trygve Lode, president, Nyx Net, public access internet < http://www.nyx.net >
"All the world's a stage...but I'm in no hurry to outgrow it." -- tl
Dawn
Stevenson) wrote:
>>>If this is about how one can genuinely subsist on $10 worth of food a
>>>week, you have to come up with genuine subsistence rations. The post
>>>didn't.
>
>>Yes, but I could survive for one week on $10. And that was my point.
>
>Then you could also survive for a week on no dollars, given a water
>supply. Neither possibility is within the realm of viable subsistence,
>merely avoiding death.
Yup I probably would be just fine. Assuming that it was a one time
occurence in my life.
Dawn, who wonders why this feels like an argument.
danah...@my-dejanews.com
If Mexicans eat anything like Mexican-Americans, then I think
Elaine's comment is right on the money. For the past 5 years
I've shopped in a grocery store that's frequented by working class
Mexican-Americans and I often get a look at their groceries at
the checkout line. There's very little variety in their diet.
There's nothing racist about making such observations.
In article <z9wl2.706$kt3....@typhoon-sf.pbi.net>,
"Syn" <syn...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Elaine...When was the last time you had dinner with a mexican family? You
> don't have the first clue as to what you are talking about. As a Mexican
> American, I find your little comment to be both racist and stupid. A little
> advice from a Mexican...Think...than speak {or type out}, your mind. You'll
> be glad you did. :-)
> Elaine Gallegos wrote in message <7736b6$ms$3...@haus.efn.org>...
> > The Mexicans spend very little on food. They get the 50lb sacks of white
> >rice and dried beans. This is supplemented with tortillas,lard and
> >hot peppers. That's it. The whole story. They don't appear to crave much
> >in the way of variety. Occasionally, they might get a few slivers of meat
> >to put into the tacos. Can't picture this diet running much more than
> >maybe 25cents or so a day. They sure as heck wouldn't spend a buck on
> >spring water.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Rabbit
> If Mexicans eat anything like Mexican-Americans, then I think
> Elaine's comment is right on the money. For the past 5 years
> I've shopped in a grocery store that's frequented by working class
> Mexican-Americans and I often get a look at their groceries at
> the checkout line. There's very little variety in their diet.
> There's nothing racist about making such observations.
>
Yes, and when I look in the carts of people around me at the supermarket it's
usually a pretty unvaried diet as well. so what?
Rabbit
Cheryl L Perkins
: If Mexicans eat anything like Mexican-Americans, then I think
: Elaine's comment is right on the money. For the past 5 years
: I've shopped in a grocery store that's frequented by working class
: Mexican-Americans and I often get a look at their groceries at
: the checkout line. There's very little variety in their diet.
: There's nothing racist about making such observations.
No, but I wonder at the implication that this is only characteristic of
Mexican-Americans. We don't have them here (well, actually Americans of
any ethnicity are pretty scarce), but we have a lot of people who seem to
eat a very unvaried diet, if I can judge by nosy looks in other people's
grocery carts, and chats with people.
Here, a lot of people don't eat much in the way of fresh fruits and
vegetables. And a lot seem to depend on one or two of the most popular
frozen or canned dinners, white bread, peanut butter and jam.
Some people have spouses who don't like anything other than really
traditional meals, other have picky children, and others just like the
food they were brought up with. The traditional diet here, before
refridgeration and freezer trucks, was very heavily dependent on salt
meat and fish and root vegetables. Many people still eat that way, except
they've added frozen TV meat/potato dinners to the mix.
My mother and grandmother liked trying new recipes and cooking from
scratch, and although I didn't appreciate it at the time ('YUCK!!! Cabbage
rolls!'), I can now cook and enjoy a varied diet.
Cheryl
--
Cheryl Perkins
cper...@stemnet.nf.ca
Syn
You're entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. In mine...almost everything
she {Elaine} said was racist.
For one...She said we wouldn't put out the buck for spring water...that's a
racist remark. How the hell would she know who spends how much on what
because of nationality?
And two...all mexicans are fat. ANYWAY!! There are fat
mexicans...whites...blacks...etc...etc...etc... Who is she to try to
pinpoint weight on just mexicans? Racist.
She can think what she pleases. I'm not trying to stop her...but at least
try to be civilized about it instead of being rude to one nationality. I'm
probably not the only person that finds this to be offensive. If it's
disscusion that's wanted...fine...but make it a disscussion and not a form
of racism. There's enough of that in this world as it is...and if as adults
we can't speak to eachother with respect in our opinions...then our kids
will never have a chance to learn the best of what we know.
.This is my opinion and I force it on no one.
Miguel Cruz
> And two...all mexicans are fat. ANYWAY!! There are fat
> mexicans...whites...blacks...etc...etc...etc... Who is she to try to
> pinpoint weight on just mexicans? Racist.
Huh? Where did she say anybody was fat? I'll reprint her quote here so your
knee doesn't have to jerk too far to read it:
> Elaine Gallegos wrote in message <7736b6$ms$3...@haus.efn.org>:
>> The Mexicans spend very little on food. They get the 50lb sacks of white
>> rice and dried beans. This is supplemented with tortillas,lard and hot
>> peppers. That's it. The whole story. They don't appear to crave much in
>> the way of variety. Occasionally, they might get a few slivers of meat to
>> put into the tacos. Can't picture this diet running much more than maybe
>> 25cents or so a day. They sure as heck wouldn't spend a buck on spring
>> water.
While I don't think her characterization is terribly accurate, I don't think
anyone's served by rabid accusations of racism. Perhaps she is just wrong?
Or maybe she's right and we're wrong, for that matter.
miguel
Michel Gagnon
> danah...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>
> : If Mexicans eat anything like Mexican-Americans, then I think
> : Elaine's comment is right on the money. For the past 5 years
> : I've shopped in a grocery store that's frequented by working class
> : Mexican-Americans and I often get a look at their groceries at
> : the checkout line. There's very little variety in their diet.
> : There's nothing racist about making such observations.
>
> No, but I wonder at the implication that this is only characteristic of
> Mexican-Americans. We don't have them here (well, actually Americans of
> any ethnicity are pretty scarce), but we have a lot of people who seem to
> eat a very unvaried diet, if I can judge by nosy looks in other people's
> grocery carts, and chats with people.
>
> Here, a lot of people don't eat much in the way of fresh fruits and
> vegetables. And a lot seem to depend on one or two of the most popular
> frozen or canned dinners, white bread, peanut butter and jam.
>
> Some people have spouses who don't like anything other than really
> traditional meals, other have picky children, and others just like the
> food they were brought up with. The traditional diet here, before
> refridgeration and freezer trucks, was very heavily dependent on salt
> meat and fish and root vegetables. Many people still eat that way, except
> they've added frozen TV meat/potato dinners to the mix.
>
> My mother and grandmother liked trying new recipes and cooking from
> scratch, and although I didn't appreciate it at the time ('YUCK!!! Cabbage
> rolls!'), I can now cook and enjoy a varied diet.
>
>
> Cheryl
A lot depends on where you are and what you like indeed. My
recollections from my many visits to Newfoundland is that people and
sceneries are great, but that food -- especially fresh food and
vegetables -- is ridiculously expensive. Our friends in the Great North
probably face the same problems as everything needs to be imported, even
in Summer. So it is easy to understand that Newfoundlanders would eat
less broccoli (for example) than Montréalers or Torontonians.
As for people of other nationalities, many don't eat meat or don't eat
as much meat as North-Americans do. Meat is usually an expensive source
of proteins and is not an efficient use of the land resources. China
probably would not be able to feed it's billion people if they all ate
meat twice a day. I'm not against meat, but I have to notice it is a
"luxury" item like having a TV... and it is much more convenient to eat
a small steak than lots of lettuce.
To compound the problem, many "ethnic" folks divide their grocery in two
or three parts. They buy their main items at the supermarket (like most
people), but will buy many specialty items (spices, sauces, even special
vegetables) at an "ethnic" store. This means the basket they fill at a
major grocery is even more blend than it should be.
P.S. Last time I visited U.S, I noted most grocery carts had many sodas,
junk items, peanut butter and bread, and that whatever else there was
was mostly prepared items rather than raw materials... and this was from
"non-ethnic" Americans. So, as one can see, everyone's opinion differs.
--
Michel Gagnon -- Michel...@videotron.ca
Montréal (Québec, Canada)
Syn
.
Miguel Cruz wrote in message <77j3mv$2ou$1...@news.ycc.yale.edu>...
Chloe
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
73111 wrote in message <77j1b0$3ic...@ounews.ou.edu>...
:x-no-archive: yes
:
:yeah, but hollering racism/racist at everything that doesn't suit your
fancy
:doesn't help and cheapens the charge.
:
:In article <s37n2.8530$kt3....@typhoon-sf.pbi.net>, "Syn"
:<syn...@pacbell.net> wrote:
:>
:>You're entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. In mine...almost
everything
:>she {Elaine} said was racist.
:>
:> For one...She said we wouldn't put out the buck for spring water...that's
a
:>racist remark. How the hell would she know who spends how much on what
:>because of nationality?
:>
:>And two...all mexicans are fat. ANYWAY!! There are fat
:>mexicans...whites...blacks...etc...etc...etc... Who is she to try to
:>pinpoint weight on just mexicans? Racist.
:>
:>She can think what she pleases. I'm not trying to stop her...but at least
:>try to be civilized about it instead of being rude to one nationality. I'm
:>probably not the only person that finds this to be offensive. If it's
:>disscusion that's wanted...fine...but make it a disscussion and not a form
:>of racism. There's enough of that in this world as it is...and if as
adults
:>we can't speak to eachother with respect in our opinions...then our kids
:>will never have a chance to learn the best of what we know.
:>
:>
:>..This is my opinion and I force it on no one.
:>>
:>>
:>>: If Mexicans eat anything like Mexican-Americans, then I think
:>
:>
:>
Syn
73111 wrote in message <77j1b0$3ic...@ounews.ou.edu>...
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>yeah, but hollering racism/racist at everything that doesn't suit your
fancy
>doesn't help and cheapens the charge.
You don't know me enough to say I holler racist and rasism at everything
wether it fancies me or not. Like I said before...It's an opinion and that's
it. No big deal. If my opinion does not fancy you...I'll get over it. But to
put down a nationality the way she did...offended me personally. It really
has nothing to do with you. I stated my thoughts as she did hers. It's done
and over with. Life goes on.
.
Chloe
social class ignorant and offensive. I just get tired to saying so every
single time. Only so many hours in a day. You're not alone. Gotta get used
to it, though. Like the Energizer Bunny she just keeps on spewing...and
spewing...and spewing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Syn wrote in message ...
:
:You're entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. In mine...almost
everything
:she {Elaine} said was racist.
:
: For one...She said we wouldn't put out the buck for spring water...that's
a
:racist remark. How the hell would she know who spends how much on what
:because of nationality?
:
:And two...all mexicans are fat. ANYWAY!! There are fat
:mexicans...whites...blacks...etc...etc...etc... Who is she to try to
:pinpoint weight on just mexicans? Racist.
:
:She can think what she pleases. I'm not trying to stop her...but at least
:try to be civilized about it instead of being rude to one nationality. I'm
:probably not the only person that finds this to be offensive. If it's
:disscusion that's wanted...fine...but make it a disscussion and not a form
:of racism. There's enough of that in this world as it is...and if as adults
:we can't speak to eachother with respect in our opinions...then our kids
:will never have a chance to learn the best of what we know.
:
:
:.This is my opinion and I force it on no one.
:
:
:
Syn
gotten me this far. I've never been one to take an offensive and keep my
mouth shut. But at least now I'll know when to just ignore and when not too.
Thanks.
.
Chloe wrote in message <369d1...@news.iglou.com>...
Elric of Imrryr
says...
> Syn <syn...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > And two...all mexicans are fat. ANYWAY!! There are fat
> > mexicans...whites...blacks...etc...etc...etc... Who is she to try to
> > pinpoint weight on just mexicans? Racist.
>
> knee doesn't have to jerk too far to read it:
>
> > Elaine Gallegos wrote in message <7736b6$ms$3...@haus.efn.org>:
> >> The Mexicans spend very little on food. They get the 50lb sacks of white
> >> rice and dried beans. This is supplemented with tortillas,lard and hot
> >> peppers. That's it. The whole story. They don't appear to crave much in
> >> the way of variety. Occasionally, they might get a few slivers of meat to
> >> put into the tacos. Can't picture this diet running much more than maybe
> >> 25cents or so a day. They sure as heck wouldn't spend a buck on spring
> >> water.
Well living in Los Angeles I often shop at the stores that cater to
the mexican american crowd... and yeah lard, fat, oil figure very
heavily in the diets. Beef is generally priced over the market in the
mexican stores (ie: it is cheaper at a national chain), but
vegatables and fruits are often cheap enough that I consider them
free (price are commonly $1.00 for 10lbs of something). Seafood is
often cheap compared to the national chains (Salmon $3/lb vs $5-8).
I'm sure they crave variety, they probably just can't afford it, or
are trying to save money for things like clothing, kids educations,
etc.
The ethnic stores are great fun to explore, you often find really
neat stuff like cacao beans (what chocolate is made of) or spices at
1/10 of what you pay elsewhere.
Syn
.
Michel Gagnon wrote in message
<1dlktdf.1sg...@ppp089.124.mmtl.videotron.net>...
>Cheryl L Perkins <cper...@stemnet.nf.ca> wrote:
>
>> danah...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> : If Mexicans eat anything like Mexican-Americans, then I think
>> : Elaine's comment is right on the money. For the past 5 years
>> : I've shopped in a grocery store that's frequented by working class
>> : Mexican-Americans and I often get a look at their groceries at
>> : the checkout line. There's very little variety in their diet.
>> : There's nothing racist about making such observations.
>>
Syn
>> And two...all mexicans are fat. ANYWAY!! There are fat
>> mexicans...whites...blacks...etc...etc...etc... Who is she to try to
>> pinpoint weight on just mexicans? Racist.
>
>Huh? Where did she say anybody was fat? I'll reprint her quote here so your
>knee doesn't have to jerk too far to read it:
Why do you sound so angry? And my knees have nothing to do with any of this.
*L*
>
>> Elaine Gallegos wrote in message <7736b6$ms$3...@haus.efn.org>:
>>> The Mexicans spend very little on food. They get the 50lb sacks of white
>>> rice and dried beans. This is supplemented with tortillas,lard and hot
>>> peppers. That's it. The whole story. They don't appear to crave much in
>>> the way of variety. Occasionally, they might get a few slivers of meat
to
>>> put into the tacos. Can't picture this diet running much more than maybe
>>> 25cents or so a day. They sure as heck wouldn't spend a buck on spring
>>> water.
>
>While I don't think her characterization is terribly accurate, I don't
think
>anyone's served by rabid accusations of racism. Perhaps she is just wrong?
>Or maybe she's right and we're wrong, for that matter.
No my friend. You're wrong. You've jumped to conclusions on things you don't
understand. But it's ok. I understand you. :-)
You have a nice day.
. Syndie
>
>miguel