Pro BEEF
Kevin M. Hebert
Lloyd Sargent <ca...@bga.com> wrote:
>I've got a kick-ass tofu green enchilada recipe that fooled my carnivore
>neighbors (they thought it was chicken).
Cool. You should post it. I love enchiladas!
>Isn't being pro-beef being anti-life (ya gotta kill a cow to get it!).
We have to kill to live. There was a great "Bloom County" cartoon several
years ago that basically stated this. First the gang gave up meat, because
it kills animals. Then they gave up eating altogether, because it kills
plants. Then they tried not to breathe, because of the millions of bacteria
that your body kills.
Who is to say which form of life is better than another? If it is wrong
to kill a cow, then what makes killing a broccoli plant right? It is
my belief that, since we are at the top of the food chain, we have the
right to make any use we feel is necessary from the bottom. However, this
also gives us the responsibility to protect what is beneath us.
-- KMH
rhaw...@iastate.edu
Kevin M. Hebert <kmhe...@seas.gwu.edu> wrote:
>It is
>my belief that, since we are at the top of the food chain, we have the
>right to make any use we feel is necessary from the bottom.
I'm still hunting in vain (or vein, in this case :) for a bumper sticker
reading "Top of the Food Chain and Proud" or "The Food Chain: Love it
or Leave it"
A couple of years ago, my Nevada paper reported an altercation at the
Iowa State Fair, in which PETA was outraged that the Pork Queen had the
audacity to throw pies back at them. Two years later, at the fair, I
was stunned to see a both selling PETA sweatshirts & t shirts. Until I
got closer. The little line below read "People for the Eating of Tasty
Animals." My wife made me buy one. THen it had a tragic accident in
the wash, shrinking from my size to hers . . . oh, well, next year . . .
--
R E HAWKINS
rhaw...@iastate.edu
Peter R Cook
Great stuff.
I wonder if liberals eat veal. 8-)
--
Peter R. Cook p...@world.std.com PRC Records Owner.
PRC Records pc...@tdh.qntm.com System Software Engineer.
Marlborough, MA USA Up The Irons! Drummer.
Dr. Jai Maharaj
U.S. Physicians Say Meat | Recent Nutritional Research
Not Necessary, | Affirms Superiority of the
Actually Harmful | Vegetarian Diet for Humans
Thirty-five years ago the US Department of Agriculture said we
should daily eat from four food groups: 1. meat, fish and poultry; 2.
grains; 3. dairy products; and 4. fruits and vegetables.
On April 9, 1991 the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine,
a prestigious non-profit organization active in health and research
policy and based in Washington, D.C., said basing our diet on those
groups not only will not ensure adequate nutrition, consumption of meat,
fish, poultry and dairy products actually causes disease.
Instead PCRM recommends a "New Four Food Groups." They are: 1.
fruits; 2. grains; 3. vegetables; and 4. legumes.
This is a very significant development for vegetarians whose
traditional vegetarian diet -- which easily fulfills the requirements of
the "new" groups -- has been under attack in many countries by physicians
sharing the common ignorance of modern medicine toward diet.
For example, numerous physicians have insisted that mothers feed
their children meat -- "A real mistake," says Dr. Neal Barnard, leading
to all sorts of diseases such as colic, juvenile diabetes, diarrhea and
later problems such as cancer of the colon. Dr. Devananda Tandavan
points out that the average doctor in America has had almost no training
whatsoever in nutrition by the time he has finished medical school and
may remain ignorant for the rest of his professional life on the
importance of diet for good health.
Though others have made similar recommendations to revise the
American diet, none have done so with quite the authority of the
4,000-plus member PCRM. The committee's president, Dr. Neal D. Barnard
- -- himself a vegetarian -- is a director of Behavioral Studies at the
Institute for Disease Prevention at George Washington University.
PCRM members instrumental in formulating the new food groups include
Dr. T. Colin Campbell, Professor of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell
University and Director of the massive China Health Project.
Collaborator Dr. Oliver Alabaster is Director of the Institute for
Disease Prevention at the George Washington University.
How did we end up with such a poor choice of food groups 35 years
ago? Inadequate nutritional research for one thing. But more
insidiously, since food guides were first established in 1916, there has
been a tendency to give animal products a "preferred" designation. "This
element of food guides has persisted until the present time, due in part
to the intensive lobbying efforts of the food industry, and despite
evidence of the adverse health effects of such foods, " says the PCRM
report.
The situation is similar to the tobacco industry's continual denial
of the harmful effects of smoking. In response to the four new food
groups, a former US Secretary of Agriculture, John R. Block (president of
the National American Wholesale Grocers' Association and a pig farmer in
Illinois) denounced the committee's recommendations as the "height of
irresponsibility."
Other reactions focused more on the difficulty of altering the food
habits of the steak- and hamburger-eating American public than on the
scientific validity of the new diet.
PCRM attacks the old, traditional four food groups on three major
fronts. First, they say, "The old food groups fail to assure nutritional
adequacy." The four food groups were established according to the
understanding of nutritional needs in 1953. Since that time, the
required daily allowances (RDA's) for protein, vitamins, minerals, etc.
have been extensively revised and expanded. A 1978 study showed that only
9 of the 17 RDA's were met by the typical diet based on the old groups.
The second problem is that "The old four food groups fail to
adequately address the current dietary problems of our population."
Specifically, the the 1977-78 Nationwide Food Consumption Survey
indicates that Americans who eat diets based on the four food groups
consume an excessive amount of fat."
Studies show that dietary fat and associated consumption of excess
protein is related to breast cancer, heart disease, obesity, kidney
disease and osteoporosis, to name a few.
Third, states the PCRM, "The old four food groups serve to
misinform consumers about some aspects of nutrition. Two of the four
food groups -- meats and dairy products -- are clearly not necessary for
health and, in fact, may be detrimental to health. . . . Populations with
the lowest rates of heart disease, colon and breast cancer, and obesity
consume very little meat or no meat at all."
The PCRM concludes that "The average adult can meet nutrient needs
by consuming five servings of grains, three servings of legumes, three
servings of vegetables and three servings of fruits each day."
The New Four Food Groups
Whole Grains: This group includes rice, bread, pasta, hot or cold
cereal, corn, millet, barley, bulgur, buckwheat groats
and tortillas. Build each of your meals around a
hearty grain dish. Grains are rich in fiber and other
complex carbohydrates, as well as proteins, B vitamins
and zinc.
Vegetables: Vegetables are packed with nutrients; they provide
vitamin C, beta-carotene, riboflavin and other
vitamins, iron, calcium and fiber. Dark green, leafy
vegetables such as broccoli, collards, kale, mustard
and turnip greens, chicory or bok choy are especially
good ources of of these important nutrients. Dark
yellow and orange vegetables such as carrots, winter
squash, sweet potatoes and pumpkin provide extra
beta-carotene. Include generous portions or a variety
of vegetables in your diet.
Legumes: Legumes, which is another name for beans, peas and
lentils, are all good sources of fiber, protein, iron,
calcium, zinc and B vitamins. This group also includes
the daals in Indian cuisine, pulses, chickpeas, baked
and refried beans, soy milk, tofu, and texturized
vegetable protein.
Fruit: Fruits are rich in fiber, vitamin C and beta-carotene.
Be sure to include at least one serving each day of
fruits that are high in vitamin C -- citrus fruits,
melons and strawberries are all good choices. Choose
whole fruit over fruit juices, which don't contain as
much healthy fiber.
| Number of |
Food Group | Servings | Typical Items and Serving Size
- - - - - - | - - - - - | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Whole Grains | 5 or more | 1/2 cup hot cereal + 1 ounce dry cereal
| | + 1 slice of bread
- - - - - - | - - - - - | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Vegetables | 3 or more | 1 cup raw + 1/2 cup cooked
- - - - - - | - - - - - | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Legumes | 2 to 3 | 1/2 cup cooked beans + 4 ounces tofu or
| | tempeh
- - - - - - | - - - - - | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Fruits | 3 or more | 1 medium piece of fruit + 1/2 cup cooked
| | fruit
Be sure to include a good source of vitamin B-12, such as fortified
cereals and vitamin supplements.
* Based on a 1991 article in Hinduism Today *
For a free, 3-month delivery of the full-color international journal
established in 1979, send your name and postal address to
hind...@mcimail.com
Sorry, U.S. addresses only.
Last year in Hawaii, we started perhaps the nation's only
govenment-sponsored campaign to include more plant-based foods in
our diet.
The taxpayer-funded nutritional education program targets kids and
parents alike in our public school system.
What is more, the Physicians Commitee for Responsible Medicine,
Washington, D.C., has concluded that not only is an animal-based
diet unnecessary, but is actually harmful.
The benefits of the healthy, plant-based food culture contrast
sharply the terrorism the animal-eating habit wages on our body,
others and the environment. That is a future we can all live with.
*-=Om Shanti=-* Jai Maharaj
jai maharaj |_|_|_|_| mantra corporation
jyotishi, vedic astrologer |_| |_| vedic prediction sciences
jaima...@mcimail.com |_|_ _|_| telex 6505614754
mci mail 561-4754 | | | | | voicemail +1 808 948 4357
Gaius Valerius Catullus
kmhe...@seas.gwu.edu (Kevin M. Hebert) writes:
> We have to kill to live. There was a great "Bloom County" cartoon several
> years ago that basically stated this. First the gang gave up meat, because
> it kills animals. Then they gave up eating altogether, because it kills
> plants. Then they tried not to breathe, because of the millions of bacteria
> that your body kills.
Kevin, do yourself and everyone here a favor and quash this debate NOW
unless you want this thread to degenerate into a fight over the
"morality" (whatever that's got to do with it) of eating meat.
Remember the last time that happened?
K R Paarlberg
>In article <D4o10...@world.std.com>, Peter R Cook <p...@world.std.com> wrote:
>> I'm not only pro-beef, I'm pro-veal. I eat at least once a week.
>>
>> Great stuff.
>>
>> I wonder if liberals eat veal. 8-)
>>
>>
>>--
>>Peter R. Cook p...@world.std.com PRC Records Owner.
>>PRC Records pc...@tdh.qntm.com System Software Engineer.
>>Marlborough, MA USA Up The Irons! Drummer.
>
>
> U.S. Physicians Say Meat | Recent Nutritional Research
> Not Necessary, | Affirms Superiority of the
> Actually Harmful | Vegetarian Diet for Humans
>
> Thirty-five years ago the US Department of Agriculture said we
>should daily eat from four food groups: 1. meat, fish and poultry; 2.
>grains; 3. dairy products; and 4. fruits and vegetables.
>
> On April 9, 1991 the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine,
>a prestigious non-profit organization active in health and research
>policy and based in Washington, D.C., said basing our diet on those
>groups not only will not ensure adequate nutrition, consumption of meat,
>fish, poultry and dairy products actually causes disease.
>
4-4-3-2 that I remember.
>
> The PCRM concludes that "The average adult can meet nutrient needs
>by consuming five servings of grains, three servings of legumes, three
>servings of vegetables and three servings of fruits each day."
>
milk group? Don't we need calcium?
>
> * Based on a 1991 article in Hinduism Today *
Could this have something to do with promoting a religious view rather than
a health view? I don't know any Hindus who would even think of eating beef.
Kevin M. Hebert
>a prestigious non-profit organization active in health and research
>policy and based in Washington, D.C., said basing our diet on those
>groups not only will not ensure adequate nutrition, consumption of meat,
>fish, poultry and dairy products actually causes disease.
Oh, really? What kinds of diseases?
> Instead PCRM recommends a "New Four Food Groups." They are: 1.
>fruits; 2. grains; 3. vegetables; and 4. legumes.
Legumes. McDonald's makes a double Quarter Pounder hamburger, and this man
wants me to eat legumes.
> Though others have made similar recommendations to revise the
>American diet, none have done so with quite the authority of the
>4,000-plus member PCRM.
4,000! Whoa! I'm putting my steak down right now!
>The committee's president, Dr. Neal D. Barnard
>- -- himself a vegetarian -- is a director of Behavioral Studies at the
>Institute for Disease Prevention at George Washington University.
George Washington University?!?! What does HE know? =)
> How did we end up with such a poor choice of food groups 35 years
>ago? Inadequate nutritional research for one thing. But more
>insidiously, since food guides were first established in 1916, there has
>been a tendency to give animal products a "preferred" designation. "This
>element of food guides has persisted until the present time, due in part
>to the intensive lobbying efforts of the food industry, and despite
>evidence of the adverse health effects of such foods, " says the PCRM
>report.
Yeah, but it tastes so good! Well worth a few health problems. I'd rather
live to be sixty, and live well, than live to 100 with a belly full of
legumes.
[list of bad things about meat deleted]
Doctor, I agree with you that meat is unhealthy. However, I (and I think
my peers on alt.mcdonalds will agree) don't care. I know it's bad for me,
but so are a lot of things! In fact, the air I breathe in this city is
full of pollutants that are absolutely not good for me. The trade off is
attending a school in a big city. There are always tradeoffs in life. I
trade cholesterol-free blood for enjoying a burger or steak now and then.
Don't get me wrong; most of my calories are obtained from grains. But,
that is what makes a meat dish so special. Last weekend, I went to the Orleans
House in Roslyn, VA with some friends. We got some fantastic steaks and I also
got some scallops. I knew the meal was technically bad for me, but the
satisfaction I got from it made it well worth it. I love vegetables, fruits,
and yes even legumes (although you MUST be kidding about that texturized
vegetable protein!), but I will not give up foods from the meat group
altogether.
> The benefits of the healthy, plant-based food culture contrast
>sharply the terrorism the animal-eating habit wages on our body,
>others and the environment. That is a future we can all live with.
Ok, Dr. maharaj, now you're being crazy. It reminds me of that scene in
Airplane! Where the lady goes "This would not have happened if we weren't a meat
eating, male society and were instead a vegetarian, female society" and the
sign language interpreter does the jerking-off symbol.
Finally, keep this stuff off alt.mcdonalds. We're incorrigible carnivores.
-- KMH
Paul N. Brothers ; CHEM
: In article <3it1s8$3...@mango.aloha.com>, Dr. Jai Maharaj <j...@aloha.com> wrote:
: Oh, really? What kinds of diseases?
You'll find out soon enough you unhealthy bastard.
: > Instead PCRM recommends a "New Four Food Groups." They are: 1.
: >fruits; 2. grains; 3. vegetables; and 4. legumes.
: Legumes. McDonald's makes a double Quarter Pounder hamburger, and this man
: wants me to eat legumes.
Well you are a pea brain.
: > Though others have made similar recommendations to revise the
: >American diet, none have done so with quite the authority of the
: >4,000-plus member PCRM.
: 4,000! Whoa! I'm putting my steak down right now!
I have a stake for you.
: Don't get me wrong; most of my calories are obtained from grains. But,
Whiskey dosen't count, lush.
[...]
PNB.
Molly Bowling
by no means representative of veggies as a group; we have doubts he is
vegetarian at all. He posts from 10+ different accounts, and has
recently begun expanding his cross-posting list (he *used* to confine it
to rec.food.veg, soc.culture.hawaii and the like) to things like
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.
There's nothing we can do about him - we've tried. Just kill file him
now and forget he ever existed.
--
[X] M Bowling
m...@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu
Always there's that space between what you feel and what you do, and in
that gap all human sadness lies.
Derek van Veen
>
>Kevin M. Hebert (kmhe...@seas.gwu.edu) wrote:
>: In article <3it1s8$3...@mango.aloha.com>, Dr. Jai Maharaj <j...@aloha.com> wrote:
>
>: Oh, really? What kinds of diseases?
>
>You'll find out soon enough you unhealthy bastard.
Oh give me a fucking break! Enough bitching from both sides! If you
don't want to eat meat, then don't eat meat. Don't try to tell those
of us who do want to eat meat not to. It's none of your goddam business!
>
>: > Instead PCRM recommends a "New Four Food Groups." They are: 1.
>: >fruits; 2. grains; 3. vegetables; and 4. legumes.
>
>: Legumes. McDonald's makes a double Quarter Pounder hamburger, and this man
>: wants me to eat legumes.
>
>Well you are a pea brain.
Nice ad hominim argument. *Very* clever.
>
>: > Though others have made similar recommendations to revise the
>: >American diet, none have done so with quite the authority of the
>: >4,000-plus member PCRM.
>
>: 4,000! Whoa! I'm putting my steak down right now!
>
>I have a stake for you.
Sorry, I think you are confusing this newsgroup with alt.fan.anne.rice.
>
>: Don't get me wrong; most of my calories are obtained from grains. But,
>
>Whiskey dosen't count, lush.
I'd argue that (good) beer does, though. As does bread, pasta, cereal and
oatmeal. And hey, let's not forget all those second-hand grains that you
can obtain through the consumption of herbavores! A steak is just a
slightly reprocessed form of grains and vegetation!
Have a nice day. And remember, Vegans are a freakish little clan (according
to Mr. KFI in Los Angeles). ;)
(It's a joke.)
- Derek DoD#1649
'75 Honda CB125s '71 VW Type III Variant
______________________________________________________________________________
"Bring the little ones unto me, and I will get a good price for them."
Dr. Jai Maharaj
m...@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu (Molly Bowling) wrote:
> On behalf of normal vegetarians everywhere, I apologize for Jai.
Apologize for your net terrorism Doki from Oki. Just take care of
yourself.
BigWave
> We have to kill to live. There was a great "Bloom County" cartoon several
> years ago that basically stated this. First the gang gave up meat, because
> it kills animals. Then they gave up eating altogether, because it kills
> plants. Then they tried not to breathe, because of the millions of bacteria
> that your body kills.
>
> Who is to say which form of life is better than another? If it is wrong
> to kill a cow, then what makes killing a broccoli plant right? It is
> my belief that, since we are at the top of the food chain, we have the
> right to make any use we feel is necessary from the bottom. However, this
> also gives us the responsibility to protect what is beneath us.
>
> -- KMH
Very well spoken, KMH... I applaud you. When liberals speak, all you
need do is find the illogical structure with which they "glue" together
their weak arguements and you find contradiction after contradiction.
The entire debate over abortion, in the liberal mind, has nothing
whatsoever to do with the importance of life (they will turn around and
argue the opposite side for saving the whales), they do not like rules
which cramp their lifestyle. You will notice how they will create
additional propoganda for safe sex, to avoid the true issue which is
sexual promescuity and responsibility... not only to themselves and their
partner, but to society.
When sharp-thinking people point this out, they will indefinately throw a
tantrum, calling you a racist, bigot, facist, or oppressor... (especially
if you happen to have been born a white, angosaxon male.)
Keep up the fight! As Rush says, "We are winning!"
David W. ev...@wsu.edu
larrabee
> When sharp-thinking people point this out, they will indefinately throw a
> tantrum, calling you a racist, bigot, facist, or oppressor... (especially
> if you happen to have been born a white, angosaxon male.)
>
> Keep up the fight! As Rush says, "We are winning!"
>
> David W. ev...@wsu.edu
You're yeucchhhy! And if you support anything that Rush says, than you
probably are a
fascist, bigot, racist and oppressor....not to mention a non-"sharp
thinker." No offense.
Sincerely,
a white, ANGLO-saxon male.
Peter R Cook
You are the one prejudging all fans of Rush Limbaugh. You are
the bigot sir.
Derek R. Larson
You know, the level of intelligence expressed in this thread is a pretty
good example of the level of intelligence of the average reader of the
groups it's posted to.
--
________________________________________________________________________
Derek R. Larson * "We're lacking in humor, a little smug,
drla...@Indiana.edu * considering ourselves to be among the
* favored few." -Terrence O'Donnell on Oregonians
Derek R. Larson
> start to dismantle the fat in Washington.
>
>
>--
It seems that those little Newtoids are good at protecting their own as
well; don't count your victory before you count the votes for a veto
override.
Seetoh Wai Keong
: I'm not only pro-beef, I'm pro-veal. I eat at least once a week.
: Great stuff. I wonder if liberals eat veal. 8-)
Notice the massive crossposting of this flamebait.
seetoh
larrabee
> >You're yeucchhhy! And if you support anything that Rush says, than you
> >probably are a
> >fascist, bigot, racist and oppressor....not to mention a non-"sharp
> >thinker." No offense.
>
> You are the one prejudging all fans of Rush Limbaugh. You are
> the bigot sir.
>
prejudging them,
I was simply judging them.
Thank you,
Brad Larrabee
larrabee
>
> Well said! The tantrums are being thrown more frequent now as we
> start to dismantle the fat in Washington.
It's "more frequently."
[scott cross]
between pro-beef and anti-beef people. To put it in perspective, let me take
an approach leaning toward pro-beef but not entirely.
There is a nutritive substance much like a vitamincalled carnitine which
is made by our bodies and is necessary for survival. Symptoms of deficiency
include lack of energy. Our bodies do not make enough, however, for best
results.
Lack of meat can actually cause problems. So why do vegetarians seem to
have more energy than meat eaters? Because most people, especially
Americans, eat too much meat, and not enough vegeteble material.
This causes a deficiency in other needed nutrients.
space goat
Hebert) wrote:
>
> > * Animal foods are the major source of pesticides. Of all,
> >95-99% are in meat, fish, eggs and dairy items.
>
> That's because pesticide concentration increases the higher one goes up the
> food chain. If we replaced all our meat diet with plants, we would have a
> similar intake of pesticides.
>
Actually, this is incorrect. Higher-ups on the food pyramid consume
greater amounts of certain pesticides and other chemicals because of
biological amplification. The pesticide amount increases because it stays
in the organism, so whatever eats it gets all of it. Since each level up
on the food chain requires about 10x more energy, each move up increases
pesticide content by 10x.
This isn't very applicable to this discussion anyway though, since our
consumption of pesticides is actually very low and virtually harmless.
Besides, pesticides are directly applied to our fruits/veggies...
___________________<shan...@leland.stanford.edu>___________________
coffee...tea...monster....coffee...tea...monster. 42,312 __o
-=-Andrew Shieh-=- from PGSAS 1993/Stanford 1998 vball++++ _`\<,_
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~shandrew/ (_)/ (_)
dfx
> * Meat-eaters have higher blood pressure, are more
>hypertensive and violent. Public funds are used for research and
>treatment. Everyone is forced to pay the price of violence and
>crime. Meat-eaters hurt themselves, their families and others.
>
> Meat-eaters hurt everyone.
> Meat-eaters hurt everyone.
> Meat-eaters hurt everyone.
AND WE'RE DAMN PROUD OF IT T00, Y0U ST00PID FR00T L00P.
After reading Ja-I-have-no-clue's lame ass, crap filled, VEGATUBULZ R
PE0PUL T00 message for the 10,000th time in the last month, I was
inspired to leave the house and make a dramatic change in my eating
habits. As I pulled up to the McDonald's drive-thru and gazed at the
death infested menu which was so obviously responsible for breast cancer,
arthritis, Erik Estrada, racism, and every tragedy in the last 9,000,000
years, Jai's words really touched me and I had a change of heart. Instead
of my usual "Can I have a #3 combo with a coke, please?", I shouted,
"Y0 B1TCH! I WANT A FUKN QUADRO-P0UNDER W1TH N0 FUKN VEGETABULZ 0R SH1T
THAT GR0WZ 0N TREEZ!"
"Ok sir, you wanted a Quarter pounder, just plain, is that correct?"
"N0 B1TCH! I ZED I WANTED A FUKN QUADR0-P0UNDER! GET IT R1TE 0R DIE!"
<quiet laughter heard through speaker>
"A what pounder?!"
"A FUKN QUADR0-P0UNDER!"
"Uh.. I don't think we have that. Are you sure you don't mean a quarter
pounder?"
"N0 I D0N'T MEEN A FUKN MEEZLY AZZ QUARTUR P0UNDER! HERE'Z WHAT I WANT -
2 FUKN D0UBLE QUARTER P0UNDERZ PUT T0GETHER 2 MAKE 1 QUADR0 P0UNDER!"
"Ooohhh.. you want *2* double quarter pounders then?"
"N0 B1TCH! I WANT 1 FUKN QUADR0 P0UNDER! TAKE THE 2 D0UBLEZ, PUT THEM
T0GETHUR AND GIV ME 1 QUADR0! U G0T IT YET BRAINIAK?"
<more laughter and employees looking out the back entrance window>
"Oh! Ok.. I think we can do that. Would you like cheese on that?"
"FUK N0 B1TCH! I WANT 4 H0T SLABZ 0F C0W DETH 0N A BUN WITH N0 FUKING
HIPPIE AZZ VEGETABULZ! I ALZ0 D0NT WANT ANY FUKING LAME VEGAN FRIEZ
0R ANY TYPE 0F RECYKULD PAKAGING. N0 KUP, N0 BAG, N0 WRAPPERZ.. PUT
THE SHIT 0N THE WIND0W K0UNTER THING AND I WILL TAKE IT. AND TELL JAI
T0 G0 FUK A K0K0NUT T00!"
"Who?!"
"FUK IT & GIMME THAT WHICH IZ THE S0URCE 0F ALL EVIL... N0W!"
"Thank you. Please drive to the 2nd window."
For the record, I got my fucking Quadro pounder and it r0cked. I am
faxing McDonald's tomorrow and demanding that this awesome item be
permanently added to every McDonald's menu around the world.
I'm a meat eater.
I'm hypertensive.
I'm violent.
And if you get in between me and a plate of animal death, I will fucking
kill your pathetic ass and then go kill some trees in order to build a
coffin to bury you in.
DETH IZ IMMINENT. THE EARTH MUZT DIE. MEAT EATERZ ARE THE MAJ0RITY AND
WE'R FUKIN PISSED. GIVE US WHAT WE WANT 0R BE PREPARED T0 FACE THE WRATH.
Drunkfux . cDc - Cult Of The Dead Cow . Senior Vice Prez
ftp.eff.org : /pub/Publications/CuD/CDC
alt.fan.cult-dead-cow
DAVID E OPALECKY
: A couple of years ago, my Nevada paper reported an altercation at the
: Iowa State Fair, in which PETA was outraged that the Pork Queen had the
: audacity to throw pies back at them. Two years later, at the fair, I
: was stunned to see a both selling PETA sweatshirts & t shirts. Until I
: got closer. The little line below read "People for the Eating of Tasty
: Animals." My wife made me buy one. THen it had a tragic accident in
: the wash, shrinking from my size to hers . . . oh, well, next year . . .
: --
: R E HAWKINS
: rhaw...@iastate.edu
I'll admit it. I'm not smart enough to be a Vegetarian. There are too
many nutrients in meat that would be hard to come by elsewhere.
D Opalecky
Joseph Pavlic
: In article <3j0rh6$8...@crl4.crl.com>, co...@crl.com (Joseph Pavlic)
: wrote:
: > Vegeterians are less violent??? Surely you jest! When's the
: > last time you've seen overweight, hypertensive American meat
: > eaters attacking Sikh temples the way vegetarian Hindus do
: > commonly in India?
: Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were "attacking Sikh
: temples," as you put it.
I hope your knowledge of medicine is greater than your knowledge of
Indian politics. I find it hard to believe that you are not aware
of Vegetarian Hindu attacks on Sikhs and Muslims at their houses
of worship.
: If you must compare, think about the atomic bombing by Americans
: of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I am sure you have knowledge of that
: event, don't you?
If I remember right it was the Japanese who were the aggressors and
they eat a lot less meat than the Americans.
: *-=Om Shanti=-* Jai Maharaj
Paul S Galvanek
>In <3j04le$b...@felix.seas.gwu.edu>, kmhe...@seas.gwu.edu (Kevin M. Hebert) writes:
>>In article <3ivm55$n...@mango.aloha.com>, Dr. Jai Maharaj <j...@aloha.com> wrote:
>
>>> * Meat-eaters have higher blood pressure, are more
>>>hypertensive and violent.
>>
>>that doesn't mean a meat eater is "more violent". Doctor, none of your
>>arguments are making any sense! You need a thick, juicy steak.
I wonder if we can expect "Dr." Jai to post the study that was reported
in a British medical journal recently... the one that reported on studies
of UK hindu communities that made use of strict vegetarian diets yet show
several time the rate of hypertension and heart related illness as the
general meat eating population.
Nah, he's skipped over all the studies showing the laundry list of neurological
problems suffered by children who are raised on vegetarian diets, so such
honesty is likely not to be expected.
Paul S. Galvanek
>
>By golly, when someone says meat makes people violent, makes me want to
>punch 'em in the nose! ;)
>
>Seriously - this guy is so far off kilter, its better to ignore him. Heated debated tend to
>belittle logic while glorifying propaganda (and I'll fight anybody who says it isn't so!)
>
>___________________________________
>B.B. Bean - former Windows user
>Now a card-carrying member of Team OS/2
>___________________________________
--
"When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women
that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit."
Elizabeth Cady Staton Oct. 16 1871 -- reach me at http://www.pitt.edu/~psg/
David Whittle
drla...@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu "Derek R. Larson" writes:
> In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.950228...@unicorn.it.wsu.edu>,
> BigWave <ev...@wsunix.wsu.edu> wrote:
> >On 25 Feb 1995, Kevin M. Hebert wrote:>
> >Very well spoken, KMH... I applaud you. When liberals speak, all you
> >need do is find the illogical structure with which they "glue" together
> >their weak arguements and you find contradiction after contradiction.
> >
> >The entire debate over abortion, in the liberal mind, has nothing
> >whatsoever to do with the importance of life (they will turn around and
> >argue the opposite side for saving the whales), they do not like rules
> >which cramp their lifestyle. You will notice how they will create
> >additional propoganda for safe sex, to avoid the true issue which is
> >sexual promescuity and responsibility... not only to themselves and their
> >partner, but to society.
> >
> >When sharp-thinking people point this out, they will indefinately throw a
> >tantrum, calling you a racist, bigot, facist, or oppressor... (especially
> >if you happen to have been born a white, angosaxon male.)
> >
> >Keep up the fight! As Rush says, "We are winning!"
> >
>
>
> You know, the level of intelligence expressed in this thread is a pretty
> good example of the level of intelligence of the average reader of the
> groups it's posted to.
>
> Why thank you very much!
>
> --
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Derek R. Larson * "We're lacking in humor, a little smug,
> drla...@Indiana.edu * considering ourselves to be among the
> * favored few." -Terrence O'Donnell on Oregonians
>
--
David
Brandon Hines
>I'll admit it. I'm not smart enough to be a Vegetarian. There are too
>many nutrients in meat that would be hard to come by elsewhere.
Really? Name them!
Brandon
Sol...@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu
Rich Young
[...]
>The pesticide amount increases because it stays
>in the organism, so whatever eats it gets all of it. [...]
Not unless whatever eats it eats ALL of the organism. Pesticides
tend to be concentrated in fats, for example, so avoiding the fat
would also avoid much (though certainly not all) of the concentrated
pesticide.
--
- Rich Young
(Hostile e-mail may be publicly posted. You have been warned.)
Los
I need some help. I need any information I can get on Fibred and or
Orts. Apparently, these companies produce flour for "lite bread" made
out of soybean hulls. If you have any info, I would much appreciate it.
Please respond via E-Mail to:
ay...@ix.netcom.com
Thanks in advance,
LOS
Dr. Jai Maharaj
Steve Connor <St...@vegsoc.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>There's some pleasant discussion going on here! I've just dropped
>into this thread, and now I feel sick.
>
>a couple of thoughts though...
>
>1) You should try beef here in the UK boys and girls - we've
> got Mad Cow Disease as well as E.Coli 157 and heart disease!
>
>2) I don't know how abortion popped up, but if you don't like it
> perhaps you should get a vasectomy?
>
>3) Choosing to live a healthier, more humane life is not 'liberal'
> 'commie'- it's just bloody sensible.
>
> Anyway - you lot should calm down a bit, those furred up arteries
> of yours can only take so much you know!
> Steve Connor
> campaigns director
> The Vegetarian Society of the UK
Hear, hear!
Last year in Hawaii, we started perhaps the nation's only
govenment-sponsored campaign to include more plant-based foods in
our diet.
The taxpayer-funded nutritional education program targets kids and
parents alike in our public school system.
What is more, the Physicians Commitee for Responsible Medicine,
Washington, D.C., has concluded that not only is an animal-based
diet unnecessary, but is actually harmful.
The benefits of the healthy, plant-based food culture contrast
sharply the terrorism the animal-eating habit wages on our body,
others and the environment. That is a future we can all live with.
Dr. Jai Maharaj
DAVID E OPALECKY <deo0141@omega> wrote:
>
> I'll admit it. I'm not smart enough to be a Vegetarian. There are too
> many nutrients in meat that would be hard to come by elsewhere.
>
> D Opalecky
U.S. Physicians Say Meat | Recent Nutritional Research
Not Necessary, | Affirms Superiority of the
Actually Harmful | Vegetarian Diet for Humans
Thirty-five years ago the US Department of Agriculture said we
should daily eat from four food groups: 1. meat, fish and poultry; 2.
grains; 3. dairy products; and 4. fruits and vegetables.
On April 9, 1991 the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine,
a prestigious non-profit organization active in health and research
policy and based in Washington, D.C., said basing our diet on those
groups not only will not ensure adequate nutrition, consumption of meat,
fish, poultry and dairy products actually causes disease.
Instead PCRM recommends a "New Four Food Groups." They are: 1.
fruits; 2. grains; 3. vegetables; and 4. legumes.
This is a very significant development for vegetarians whose
traditional vegetarian diet -- which easily fulfills the requirements of
the "new" groups -- has been under attack in many countries by physicians
sharing the common ignorance of modern medicine toward diet.
For example, numerous physicians have insisted that mothers feed
their children meat -- "A real mistake," says Dr. Neal Barnard, leading
to all sorts of diseases such as colic, juvenile diabetes, diarrhea and
later problems such as cancer of the colon. Dr. Devananda Tandavan
points out that the average doctor in America has had almost no training
whatsoever in nutrition by the time he has finished medical school and
may remain ignorant for the rest of his professional life on the
importance of diet for good health.
Though others have made similar recommendations to revise the
American diet, none have done so with quite the authority of the
4,000-plus member PCRM. The committee's president, Dr. Neal D. Barnard
- -- himself a vegetarian -- is a director of Behavioral Studies at the
Institute for Disease Prevention at George Washington University.
PCRM members instrumental in formulating the new food groups include
Dr. T. Colin Campbell, Professor of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell
University and Director of the massive China Health Project.
Collaborator Dr. Oliver Alabaster is Director of the Institute for
Disease Prevention at the George Washington University.
How did we end up with such a poor choice of food groups 35 years
ago? Inadequate nutritional research for one thing. But more
insidiously, since food guides were first established in 1916, there has
been a tendency to give animal products a "preferred" designation. "This
element of food guides has persisted until the present time, due in part
to the intensive lobbying efforts of the food industry, and despite
evidence of the adverse health effects of such foods, " says the PCRM
report.
The situation is similar to the tobacco industry's continual denial
of the harmful effects of smoking. In response to the four new food
groups, a former US Secretary of Agriculture, John R. Block (president of
the National American Wholesale Grocers' Association and a pig farmer in
Illinois) denounced the committee's recommendations as the "height of
irresponsibility."
Other reactions focused more on the difficulty of altering the food
habits of the steak- and hamburger-eating American public than on the
scientific validity of the new diet.
PCRM attacks the old, traditional four food groups on three major
fronts. First, they say, "The old food groups fail to assure nutritional
adequacy." The four food groups were established according to the
understanding of nutritional needs in 1953. Since that time, the
required daily allowances (RDA's) for protein, vitamins, minerals, etc.
have been extensively revised and expanded. A 1978 study showed that only
9 of the 17 RDA's were met by the typical diet based on the old groups.
The second problem is that "The old four food groups fail to
adequately address the current dietary problems of our population."
Specifically, the the 1977-78 Nationwide Food Consumption Survey
indicates that Americans who eat diets based on the four food groups
consume an excessive amount of fat."
Studies show that dietary fat and associated consumption of excess
protein is related to breast cancer, heart disease, obesity, kidney
disease and osteoporosis, to name a few.
Third, states the PCRM, "The old four food groups serve to
misinform consumers about some aspects of nutrition. Two of the four
food groups -- meats and dairy products -- are clearly not necessary for
health and, in fact, may be detrimental to health. . . . Populations with
the lowest rates of heart disease, colon and breast cancer, and obesity
consume very little meat or no meat at all."
The PCRM concludes that "The average adult can meet nutrient needs
by consuming five servings of grains, three servings of legumes, three
servings of vegetables and three servings of fruits each day."
The New Four Food Groups
Whole Grains: This group includes rice, bread, pasta, hot or cold
cereal, corn, millet, barley, bulgur, buckwheat groats
and tortillas. Build each of your meals around a
hearty grain dish. Grains are rich in fiber and other
complex carbohydrates, as well as proteins, B vitamins
and zinc.
Vegetables: Vegetables are packed with nutrients; they provide
vitamin C, beta-carotene, riboflavin and other
vitamins, iron, calcium and fiber. Dark green, leafy
vegetables such as broccoli, collards, kale, mustard
and turnip greens, chicory or bok choy are especially
good ources of of these important nutrients. Dark
yellow and orange vegetables such as carrots, winter
squash, sweet potatoes and pumpkin provide extra
beta-carotene. Include generous portions or a variety
of vegetables in your diet.
Legumes: Legumes, which is another name for beans, peas and
lentils, are all good sources of fiber, protein, iron,
calcium, zinc and B vitamins. This group also includes
the daals in Indian cuisine, pulses, chickpeas, baked
and refried beans, soy milk, tofu, and texturized
vegetable protein.
Fruit: Fruits are rich in fiber, vitamin C and beta-carotene.
Be sure to include at least one serving each day of
fruits that are high in vitamin C -- citrus fruits,
melons and strawberries are all good choices. Choose
whole fruit over fruit juices, which don't contain as
much healthy fiber.
| Number of |
Food Group | Servings | Typical Items and Serving Size
- - - - - - | - - - - - | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Whole Grains | 5 or more | 1/2 cup hot cereal + 1 ounce dry cereal
| | + 1 slice of bread
- - - - - - | - - - - - | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Vegetables | 3 or more | 1 cup raw + 1/2 cup cooked
- - - - - - | - - - - - | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Legumes | 2 to 3 | 1/2 cup cooked beans + 4 ounces tofu or
| | tempeh
- - - - - - | - - - - - | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Fruits | 3 or more | 1 medium piece of fruit + 1/2 cup cooked
| | fruit
Be sure to include a good source of vitamin B-12, such as fortified
cereals and vitamin supplements.
* Based on a 1991 article in Hinduism Today *
For a free, 3-month delivery of the full-color international journal
established in 1979, send your name and postal address to
hind...@mcimail.com
Sorry, U.S. addresses only.
Dr. Jai Maharaj
>Dr. Jai Maharaj (j...@mantra.com) wrote:
>: In article <3j0rh6$8...@crl4.crl.com>, co...@crl.com (Joseph Pavlic)
>: wrote:
>: > Vegeterians are less violent??? Surely you jest! When's the
>: > last time you've seen overweight, hypertensive American meat
>: > eaters attacking Sikh temples the way vegetarian Hindus do
>: > commonly in India?
>
>: Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were "attacking Sikh
>: temples," as you put it.
>
I ask again: Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were
"attacking Sikh temples," as you put it.
*-=Om Shanti=-* Jai Maharaj
Los
Hello,
Woops, should have changed the title on the last post...
Anyway, a repost:
Chuck Narad
thread? this is a case of all-beef SPAM, folks....
c/
-----------------------------------------------------------
| Chuck Narad -- diver/adventurer/engineer |
| |
| "The universe is full of magical things, patiently |
| waiting for our wits to grow sharper." |
| |
| -- Eden Phillpotts |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Jai Maharaj
>>
>> Last year in Hawaii, we started perhaps the nation's only
>>govenment-sponsored campaign to include more plant-based foods in
>>our diet.
>> The taxpayer-funded nutritional education program targets kids
>>and parents alike in our public school system.
>> What is more, the Physicians Commitee for Responsible Medicine,
>>Washington, D.C., has concluded that not only is an animal-based
>>diet unnecessary, but is actually harmful.
>> The benefits of the healthy, plant-based food culture contrast
>>sharply the terrorism the animal-eating habit wages on our body,
>>others and the environment. That is a future we can all live with.
>
>
> meat, and I like it.
Since the meat-eating habit adversely affects others, legislation
is necessary. If your preference hurts others, you must be stopped
from acting on your preference.
> 3. There have been studies that have shown that eating meat
> has no ill effects on the body. It is more environment and
> stress related.
You have not cited any such studies. Here is more information
for you:
Andrew Hall
Joseph> Dr. Jai Maharaj (j...@mantra.com) wrote:
>> In article <3j0rh6$8...@crl4.crl.com>, co...@crl.com (Joseph
>> Pavlic)
wrote>
>> Vegeterians are less violent??? Surely you jest! When's the >
>> last time you've seen overweight, hypertensive American meat >
>> eaters attacking Sikh temples the way vegetarian Hindus do >
>> commonly in India?
>> Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were "attacking Sikh
>> temples," as you put it.
Joseph> I hope your knowledge of medicine is greater than your
Joseph> knowledge of Indian politics. I find it hard to believe
Joseph> that you are not aware of Vegetarian Hindu attacks on Sikhs
Joseph> and Muslims at their houses of worship.
Yes Hindus did attack these places. However, I never saw anything about
them being vegetarians. On what do you base this claim?
ah
=======================================================================
We have engaged in a very -- a very -- an extraordinarily broad
exercise of diplomacy here ... I don't know what -- what it means
fully.
-- Ex President George Bush.
Peter R Cook
>Hear, hear!
>
> Last year in Hawaii, we started perhaps the nation's only
>govenment-sponsored campaign to include more plant-based foods in
>our diet.
> The taxpayer-funded nutritional education program targets kids and
>parents alike in our public school system.
> What is more, the Physicians Commitee for Responsible Medicine,
>Washington, D.C., has concluded that not only is an animal-based
>diet unnecessary, but is actually harmful.
> The benefits of the healthy, plant-based food culture contrast
>sharply the terrorism the animal-eating habit wages on our body,
>others and the environment. That is a future we can all live with.
>
1. Please remove alt.fan.rush.limbaugh from this thread as I
have done.
2. Please do not legislate your preferences. I prefer to eat
meat, and I like it.
3. There have been studies that have shown that eating meat
has no ill effects on the body. It is more environment and
stress related.
4. I still like veal. 8-)
Peter R Cook
>>>>>> Joseph Pavlic writes:
> Joseph> Dr. Jai Maharaj (j...@mantra.com) wrote:
> >> In article <3j0rh6$8...@crl4.crl.com>, co...@crl.com (Joseph
> >> Pavlic)
> wrote>
> >> Vegeterians are less violent??? Surely you jest! When's the >
> >> last time you've seen overweight, hypertensive American meat >
> >> eaters attacking Sikh temples the way vegetarian Hindus do >
> >> commonly in India?
> >> Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were "attacking Sikh
> >> temples," as you put it.
> Joseph> I hope your knowledge of medicine is greater than your
> Joseph> knowledge of Indian politics. I find it hard to believe
> Joseph> that you are not aware of Vegetarian Hindu attacks on Sikhs
> Joseph> and Muslims at their houses of worship.
>Yes Hindus did attack these places. However, I never saw anything about
>them being vegetarians. On what do you base this claim?
One of the most basic parts of the Hindu religion is respect for
animals, even insects. I would venture to say it's a rare Hindu
that eats meat. Most would be veggies by nature of their beliefs.
Peter R Cook
The key word is "all" or the implication of "all". Sure some Rush
fans may be racists and maybe even 100% USDA fascists, but not all
of them.
Joseph Pavlic
: In article <3j1vvc$3...@crl8.crl.com>,
: >Dr. Jai Maharaj (j...@mantra.com) wrote:
: >: In article <3j0rh6$8...@crl4.crl.com>, co...@crl.com (Joseph Pavlic)
: >: wrote:
: >: > Vegeterians are less violent??? Surely you jest! When's the
: >: > last time you've seen overweight, hypertensive American meat
: >: > eaters attacking Sikh temples the way vegetarian Hindus do
: >: > commonly in India?
: >
: >: Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were "attacking Sikh
: >: temples," as you put it.
: >
: >I find it hard to believe that you are not aware
: >of Vegetarian Hindu attacks on Sikhs . . .
: I ask again: Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were
: "attacking Sikh temples," as you put it.
Does this mean that you do admit that Vegetarian Hindus did
attack Muslim mosques in India?
Could you tell us about the combatants in Sri Lanka, is one
side in that battle predominantly vegeterian or are they
all meat eaters?
: *-=Om Shanti=-* Jai Maharaj
Brad E. Price III
>In article <3iu7pn$12...@bubba.ucc.okstate.edu>,
>m...@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu (Molly Bowling) wrote:
> > On behalf of normal vegetarians everywhere, I apologize for Jai.
>Apologize for your net terrorism Doki from Oki. Just take care of
>yourself.
Apologize yourself there Jai. I love meat. Meat is good. How about we
discuss this over a nice, juicy gardenburger? Wrong. They taste like shit.
Eat a Big Mac...ypu'll feel a lot better.
--Brad
Bhaskar Manda
>On behalf of normal vegetarians everywhere, I apologize for Jai.
Nice subliminal definition of "normal" vegetarians.
Bha...@orion.me.uiuc.edu
Gautam Gandhi
Right Jerky Boy wannnabe...
peace out,
G
Jim Hoffman
In article <3j04le$b...@felix.seas.gwu.edu>, Kevin M. Hebert
<kmhe...@seas.gwu.edu> wrote:
>In article <3ivm55$n...@mango.aloha.com>, Dr. Jai Maharaj <j...@aloha.com> wrote:>>A meat-eater's habit hurts others too:
>
>> * The raw materials needed for food production from
>>livestock exceed all oil, gas and coal consumption. Meat-eaters
>>hurt themselves, their families and others.
>
>Cows eat the grains we don't. We can feed range cattle grasses our bodies
>could never digest. Raising cattle is an EFFICIENT way to make a food product
>we CAN use out of soemthing we CAN'T.
Much of the cattle in the USA is raised on prime farm land which could be used
for growing food for human consumption. Cattle graising on agriculturally
marginal lands creates a number of problems, such as erosion and the
damage of ecosystems.
>> * Producing least-efficient plant-based food is 10 times
>>more efficient than producing most-efficient animal-based food.
>>Meat-eaters adversely affect everyone.
>
>Your second statement does not follow directly from the first. Yes, it is
>technically more efficient to raise grain than steers. However (and this is
>assuming that that fact makes any difference whatsoever in terms of people
>eating meat or not, which it really doesn't), it is also well known that
>since cows eat grasses we can't, since our bodies don't digest celluose,
>we can make an edible food (beef) out of an inedible one (range grass) by
>raising cattle.
See above. Also, it's notable that the trend is toward factory farming,
where large numbers of cattle are warehoused and fed grains and anti-biotics,
not range-grass.
>> * There is overwhelming evidence the the meat-eating habit
>>causes stroke and heart diseases. Public funds are used for
>>research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt themselves, their
>>families and others.
>
>Stroke and heart disease would exist without meat eaters. It is an important
>cause to try to end these diseases.
They would only exist to a small fraction of the extent to which they exist now.
And how does one end these diseases? The simplest way is to eliminate the
cause, not devise complicated treatments, such as open-heart surgery,
artificial hearts, drugs with potentially dangerous side effects, etc.
>> * Animal foods are the major source of pesticides. Of all,
>>95-99% are in meat, fish, eggs and dairy items.
>
>That's because pesticide concentration increases the higher one goes up the
>food chain. If we replaced all our meat diet with plants, we would have a
>similar intake of pesticides.
You contradict yourself. If you eat cattle you are one level higher on
the food chain than if you eat plants. Assuming that the bio-magnification
factor is 10 at each trophic level, eating cattle would subject you to 10
times the level of toxins as eating the grains consumed by the cattle.
-Jim Hoffman
And
on seal meat since the first humans moved into that region. For hundreds
of thousands of years, centuries ago, eskimos would "hunt" by standing for
hours staring at a hole in the ice until a seal stuck it's nose through to
breathe, then they would spear it.
The meat provided food, the skins clothes, the oil heat, and they were
able to survive.
Need this argument thread about meat to continue??
Kevin M. Hebert
Gaius Valerius Catullus <g.valeriu...@dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>Kevin, do yourself and everyone here a favor and quash this debate NOW
>unless you want this thread to degenerate into a fight over the
>"morality" (whatever that's got to do with it) of eating meat.
>Remember the last time that happened?
Didn't we win?
-- KMH
Seetoh Wai Keong
: Seriously - this guy is so far off kilter, its better to ignore him. Heated debated tend to
: belittle logic while glorifying propaganda (and I'll fight anybody who says it isn't so!)
This flamebait has been x-posted to more than 10 newsgroups.
Apparently, someone is enjoying the flames.
seetoh
Kevin McCabe
: I'm not only pro-beef, I'm pro-veal. I eat at least once a week.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Really? I eat about 21 times a week. I only eat veal about once a week.
: Great stuff.
: I wonder if liberals eat veal. 8-)
Damn them liberals! I betcha they hate cows. Bastards! I hate 'em.
If it weren't fer liberals, I'd have no one to hate. Well, I guess
that ain't true. Rush would tell me whom to hate, that's fer sure.
Yeah. Ditto. Doubleditto. Gimme a steak and make sure it's still
bleedin'. ( please place :^) where neccesary)
(where the hell do conservatives get off thinking they're the only
ones who like a good juicy steak?)
BTW, I found the veggie-post to be interesting and informative. I
doubt I'll change my eating habits TOO much, but it's not like
knowing more about nutrition is BAD for me or anything.
random thought. apologies to whomever wants one.
kevin
___________________________________________________
| |
| Kevin McCabe IBM Toronto |
| "This one goes to eleven." - Nigel Tuffnel |
|___________________________________________________|
Dr. Jai Maharaj
asa...@cs9sun.calstatela.edu (And) wrote:
> Eskimos in the freezing northern polar regions have been living
> exclusively on seal meat since the first humans moved into that
The excess protein in the Eskimo meat diet is responsible for
the very high incidence of osteoporosis among them:
". . . are the native Eskimos. If osteoporosis were a
calcium deficiency disease it would be unheard of among these
people. They have the highest dietary calcium intake of any people
in the world -- more than 2,000 mg. a day from fish bones.[53]
"On the other hand, if osteoporosis is caused by excess
protein in the diet, they would suffer greatly from the disease,
because their diet is also the very highest in he world in protein
-- 250 to 400 grams a day from fish, walrus and whale.[54]"
"As it happens, unfortunately, the native Eskimo people
have one of the very highest rates of osteoporosis in the world.[55]
Sources:
[53] Mazess, R., "Bone Mineral Content of North Alaskan Eskimos,"
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION, 27:916, 1974.
[54] Ibid.
[55] Ibid.
Excerpts from Robbins, J., DIET FOR A NEW AMERICA, Stillpoint,
1987.
Omar F. Lari
> Researchers from the National Cancer Institute assured
> Congressmen that it might be possible for only one molecule of
> DES in the 340,000,000,000,000 present in a quarter pound of
> beef liver to trigger human cancer.
-------------------------------------------------------
I'm not taking any sides in this discussion, but
I find it interesting and somewhat amusing how people
write out numbers for a desired effect:
Why write out 340,000,000,000,000, with all the zeros
when one can simply say 340 trillion? Or use scientific
notation? Well, the zeros add to the effect, of course!
However, we're dealing on the molecular level here, so
talking in the trillions might very well be expected!
It would have sufficed to simply say that the substance was
determined to be highly carcinogenic, instead of playing
the old numbers game. : )
In Peace,
Omar F. Lari
Dr. Jai Maharaj
>: asa...@cs9sun.calstatela.edu (And) wrote:
>:> Eskimos in the freezing northern polar regions have been living
>:> exclusively on seal meat since the first humans moved into that
>:> region. . . .
>
>: The excess protein in the Eskimo meat diet is responsible
>: for
>: the very high incidence of osteoporosis among them:
>: ". . . are the native Eskimos. If osteoporosis were
>: a
>: calcium deficiency disease it would be unheard of among these
>: people. They have the highest dietary calcium intake of any
>: people
>: in the world -- more than 2,000 mg. a day from fish bones.[53]
>
Study the sources of information provided before attempting to
ridicule the information.
Joseph Pavlic
: co...@crl.com (Joseph Pavlic) wrote:
: >: The excess protein in the Eskimo meat diet is responsible
: >: for
: >: the very high incidence of osteoporosis among them:
: >: ". . . are the native Eskimos. If osteoporosis were
: >: a
: >: calcium deficiency disease it would be unheard of among these
: >: people. They have the highest dietary calcium intake of any
: >: people
: >: in the world -- more than 2,000 mg. a day from fish bones.[53]
: >
: > Doc, don't you know that calcium . . .
: Study the sources of information provided before attempting to
: ridicule the information.
I questioned, not ridiculed the info. Are you denying that for
calcium to be utilized by the body one needs vitamin D? Do you
also deny that the major source of vitamin D for humans is
sunshine and the Inuit get sunshine for only about 3 months
out of the year?
Kevin M. Hebert
>A meat-eater's habit hurts others too:
> * The raw materials needed for food production from
>livestock exceed all oil, gas and coal consumption. Meat-eaters
>hurt themselves, their families and others.
What do you mean by this? Do you mean the grain production to feed the cows?
Cows eat the grains we don't. We can feed range cattle grasses our bodies
could never digest. Raising cattle is an EFFICIENT way to make a food product
we CAN use out of soemthing we CAN'T.
> * Producing least-efficient plant-based food is 10 times
>more efficient than producing most-efficient animal-based food.
>Meat-eaters adversely affect everyone.
Your second statement does not follow directly from the first. Yes, it is
technically more efficient to raise grain than steers. However (and this is
assuming that that fact makes any difference whatsoever in terms of people
eating meat or not, which it really doesn't), it is also well known that
since cows eat grasses we can't, since our bodies don't digest celluose,
we can make an edible food (beef) out of an inedible one (range grass) by
raising cattle.
> * A Vegetarian diet will cut oil imports by over 60% and
>supply of renewable energy will increase 120-150%. Meat-eaters
>hurt themselves, their families and others.
This is getting to be a very singsong argument. Prove that a vegetarian diet
will do as you say. I simply don't believe it. Cite your source, and I will
look it up.
> * Meat-eaters have higher blood pressure, are more
>hypertensive and violent.
Now you're being ridiculous. Yes, a meat diet can lead to hypertension. But
that doesn't mean a meat eater is "more violent". Doctor, none of your
arguments are making any sense! You need a thick, juicy steak.
>Public funds are used for research and
>treatment. Everyone is forced to pay the price of violence and
>crime. Meat-eaters hurt themselves, their families and others.
More made-up nonfacts.
> * There is overwhelming evidence the the meat-eating habit
>causes stroke and heart diseases. Public funds are used for
>research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt themselves, their
>families and others.
Stroke and heart disease would exist without meat eaters. It is an important
cause to try to end these diseases.
> * Red meat causes colon cancer, #2 cause of cancer in the
>U.S. Meat-eaters are 2-1/2 times more likely to get it. Public
>funds are used for research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt
>themselves, their families and others.
Yadda, yadda, yadda. Doctor, you are becoming increasingly annoying. Meat
eaters know the risks. I (and others) choose to ignore them. Mmm, hamburgers!
> * The meat-eating habit kills rain forests, 38% of all rain
>forests destroyed in Brazil because of it. Meat-eaters hurt
>everyone.
Meat eaters are heathen bastards; are you happy now? Most rain forests are
destroyed to raise the very grain crops you harp so much about. Do I say
plant eaters hurt everyone? Nope. As for McDonald's (where this thread
originated as far as I know), McDonald's doesn't use ANY rain forest
beef.
> * The meat habit kills our supply of medicines, about a
>fourth of them come from tropical rain forests. Meat-eaters hurt
>everyone.
See above; the same could be said about plant eaters (although the correlatiob
is so bizarre I will ignore it for now).
> * The beef diet causes excess carbon dioxide and global
>warming as forests are burned for the U.S. meat habit.
>Meat-eaters hurt everyone.
I forget how we built those log cabins for our range cattle. Doctor, in
the U.S., nearly ALL the cattle is raised in the plains regions, where there
weren't any trees to burn!
> * Meat-eaters have double the bone loss; vegetarians have
>significantly stronger bones. Public funds are used for research
>and treatment of arthritis, osteoporosis and other bone-related
>diseases. Meat-eaters hurt themselves, their families and others.
So if a meateater takes a calcium pill, it's OK? Again, your arguments
are very poor. You're just setting up multitudes of straw men which are
easy to knock down.
> * The meat diet's excess protein causes calcium loss which
>causes painful kidney stones in meat-eaters. Public funds are
>used for research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt themselves,
>their families and others.
See above.
> * Animal foods are the major source of pesticides. Of all,
>95-99% are in meat, fish, eggs and dairy items.
That's because pesticide concentration increases the higher one goes up the
food chain. If we replaced all our meat diet with plants, we would have a
similar intake of pesticides.
>Public funds are
>used for research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt themselves,
>their families and others.
Are you writing a poem? This is really bad, Doctor -- and it doesn't help
your position.
> * The production of meat, eggs, dairy items accounts for 33%
>of all raw materials.
In the whole world? Hardly.
>Meat-eaters hurt everyone.
See a pattern, anyone?
[more unsubstantiated evidence removed]
Doctor, even if EVERYTHING you said was ABSOLUTELY true, I'd still eat beef
and pork and chicken and fish and all sorts of good stuff like that. You
haven't swayed anyone an iota. Mostly because a lot of what you said is
simply untrue.
-- KMH
Dr. Jai Maharaj
>>
>>When hormones were first introduced into livestock production,
>>after World War II, the meat industry was virtually ecstatic. The
>>manufacturer of diethylstilbestrol, known as DES, humbly hailed
>>the event as the most important event in the history of food
>>production.
>>Because it produced more fat and more weight in animals, and thus
>>more profit for the meat industry, DES came to be used on more
>>than 90% of America's cattle. It was called a "miracle."
>
> If DES was such a powerful carcinogenic how come the animals did
> not die from cancer? If they do die from DES induced cancer why
> would factory farms what to use it and loose their stock?
The animals must die form the slaughter first and the greedy
industry pocket the blood money before the cancer kills.
For more information, read the cited references:
- Schell, O., "Modern Meat"
Vintage Books, Random House, 1985, pgs. 197, 198, 254, 257-268.
- Hadlow, W., "Stilbestrol-Contaminated Feed and Reproductive
Disturbances in Mice," Science, 122:3171, 1955, pgs. 643-644.
- Verrett, J., and Carper, J., "Eating May be Hazardous to Your
Health," Simon and Schuster, 1974, pg. 170.
- Robbins, John, "Diet For A New America"
Stillpoint Publishing, Walpole, N.H., 1987, pgs. 312-313.
Last year in Hawaii, we started perhaps the nation's only
govenment-sponsored campaign to include more plant-based foods in
our diet.
The taxpayer-funded nutritional education program targets kids and
parents alike in our public school system.
What is more, the Physicians Commitee for Responsible Medicine,
Washington, D.C., has concluded that not only is an animal-based
diet unnecessary, but is actually harmful.
The benefits of the healthy, plant-based food culture contrast
sharply the terrorism the animal-eating habit wages on our body,
others and the environment. That is a future we can all live with.
*-=Om Shanti=-* Jai Maharaj
NEFARiOUS
>MEAT-EATERS HURT THEMSELVES, THEIR FAMILIES AND OTHERS
>
> * The raw materials needed for food production from
>livestock exceed all oil, gas and coal consumption. Meat-eaters
>hurt themselves, their families and others.
>
>more efficient than producing most-efficient animal-based food.
oh yeah? if vegitarianism is so healy, then why are all the vegetarians i know
ugly freaks?
>NOTE: Meat-eating includes the eating of animals, birds and fish.
^^^^^^^
ahh, for a second there i thought that birds and fish were plants... thanks
for clearing that one up.
P.S. The way i see it, we should be *happy* that we are on top of the food
chain... take advantage of it.
P.P.S. if you are pathetic enough that you want to flame, send them via email
so you wont clutter up the newsgroup (and so i can delete them without
reading em). thank you.
>*-=Om Shanti=-* Jai Maharaj
>
> jai maharaj |_|_|_|_| mantra corporation
> jyotishi, vedic astrologer |_| |_| vedic prediction sciences
> jaima...@mcimail.com |_|_ _|_| telex 6505614754
> mci mail 561-4754 | | | | | voicemail +1 808 948 4357
- me
Dr. Jai Maharaj
Bon Appe-__it!
Rinses are used to mask contaminated carcasses in the typical
American meat plant. Carcasses are supposed to be washed down to
rinse the dust off during the disassembly process. However,
according to federal meat inspector Dora Fries:
"The pre-washer adds water to the carcass and covers up dirt.
Have you ever taken a piece of warm tallow [beef fat], put some
fecal matter on it, washed it with pressure like the pre-washer
has, then you look at it, it looks clean.
"Take a sharp knife and slice very thinly and see all of the
fecal matter buried in the fat yet. I have done this test. Why
else did they put in a pre-wash but to cover up fecal matter and
add water so the carcasses will weigh more. The pre-washer does
not wash off dirt, it just buries it in the fat."
Recently twenty-four USDA inspectors sent a joint letter to the
National Academy of Sciences raising concerns on the wholesomeness
of the U.S. beef supply. Their letter concluded, "In good
conscience, we can no longer say that we know USDA-approved beef
is wholesome. . . . USDA advertises the SIS [Streamlined
Inspection System] as fewer inspectors looking at less meat on
more carcasses at faster line speeds, all without lowering public
health standards. We don't buy it."
- Commentary from Dora Fries to Linda Carey, January 18, 1989
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection
Service, USDA Docket No. 83-008P, pg. 1.
- Government Accountability Project
Summary of 1990 Whistleblowing Disclosures on USDA's Proposed
Streamlined Inspection System, GAP, Washington, D.C., 1990
Summary 1.
- Rifkin, Jeremy, "Beyond Beef: The Rise and Fall of the Cattle
Culture," Dutton, N.Y., 1992, pgs. 138-139.
Molly Bowling
>In article <3iu7pn$12...@bubba.ucc.okstate.edu>,
>m...@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu (Molly Bowling) wrote:
> > On behalf of normal vegetarians everywhere, I apologize for Jai.
>Apologize for your net terrorism Doki from Oki. Just take care of
>yourself.
See what I was sayin'? :) Just killfile him now - your life will be
enriched for it.
--
[X] M Bowling
m...@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu
Always there's that space between what you feel and what you do, and in
that gap all human sadness lies.
Yabba Dabba Dude
>In article <3itvpo$q...@felix.seas.gwu.edu>,> > [list of bad things about meat deleted]
> >
> >Doctor, I agree with you that meat is unhealthy. However, I (and I think
> >my peers on alt.mcdonalds will agree) don't care. I know it's bad for me,
> >[...]
>
>A meat-eater's habit hurts others too:
>
>
> * The raw materials needed for food production from
>livestock exceed all oil, gas and coal consumption. Meat-eaters
>hurt themselves, their families and others.
>
> * Producing least-efficient plant-based food is 10 times
>more efficient than producing most-efficient animal-based food.
>
> * A Vegetarian diet will cut oil imports by over 60% and
>
>
> * There is overwhelming evidence the the meat-eating habit
>causes stroke and heart diseases. Public funds are used for
>families and others.
>
>U.S. Meat-eaters are 2-1/2 times more likely to get it. Public
>
>forests destroyed in Brazil because of it. Meat-eaters hurt
>everyone.
>
>fourth of them come from tropical rain forests. Meat-eaters hurt
>everyone.
>
>warming as forests are burned for the U.S. meat habit.
>Meat-eaters hurt everyone.
>
>significantly stronger bones. Public funds are used for research
>and treatment of arthritis, osteoporosis and other bone-related
>
> * The meat diet's excess protein causes calcium loss which
>causes painful kidney stones in meat-eaters. Public funds are
>their families and others.
>
>used for research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt themselves,
>their families and others.
>
>Meat-eaters hurt everyone.
>
> * The meat-eating habit dumps twice the pollutants as
>released by all U.S. industrial sources. 1 billion tons a year.
>Meat-eaters hurt everyone.
>
> * Cancer-causing, deadly toxaphene is used for dipping
>cattle. Toxaphene is retained in animal flesh. Public funds are
>used for research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt themselves,
>their families and others.
>
> * Hormones added to animals increase profits but cause
>cancer, impotence, infertility and other illnesses. Public funds
>are used for research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt
>
>less than 165 pounds of beef. Meat-eaters hurt everyone.
>
> * The meat, including poultry, sold today is grossly
>infected with both coliform bacteria and salmonella. Public
>funds are used for research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt
>
>unlike animal-based foods. Meat-eaters cause public funds to be
>used for medical research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt
>
>crippling degenerative diseases. Public funds are used for
>research and treatment. Meat-eaters hurt themselves, their
>families and others.
>
> * U.S. livestock consumes enough grain and soybeans to feed
>over 5 times the entire U.S. human population. Meat-eaters hurt
>everyone.
>
> * Diet-style changes would not only halt the process of
>deforestation, they would actually reverse it. Meat-eaters hurt
>everyone.
>
> * Womens' risk of breast cancer rises dramatically with
>their intake of meat. Public funds are used for research and
>treatment. Meat-eating women hurt themselves, their families and
>others.
>
> * Most effective way of minimizing pesticide intake is to
>eliminate meats, fish, dairy products and eggs. This is the way
>to eliminate the terrorism meat-eaters perpetrate on themselves,
>their families and society.
>
>NOTE: Meat-eating includes the eating of animals, birds and fish.
>
Mooooooooooo!
Yabba
--------------------------------------------
Peasant: "What are you doing about the war on poverty ?"
King: "Nothing. Its over, and you lost"
Andrew Hall
>>>>> Peter R Cook writes:
Peter> ah...@cs.uml.edu (Andrew Hall) writes:
>>>>>>> Joseph Pavlic writes:
Joseph> Dr. Jai Maharaj (j...@mantra.com) wrote:
>> >> In article <3j0rh6$8...@crl4.crl.com>, co...@crl.com (Joseph
>> >> Pavlic)
wrote>
>> >> Vegeterians are less violent??? Surely you jest! When's the >
>> >> last time you've seen overweight, hypertensive American meat >
>> >> eaters attacking Sikh temples the way vegetarian Hindus do >
>> >> commonly in India?
>> >> Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were "attacking Sikh
>> >> temples," as you put it.
Joseph> I hope your knowledge of medicine is greater than your
Joseph> knowledge of Indian politics. I find it hard to believe
Joseph> that you are not aware of Vegetarian Hindu attacks on Sikhs
Joseph> and Muslims at their houses of worship.
>> Yes Hindus did attack these places. However, I never saw anything about
>> them being vegetarians. On what do you base this claim?
Peter> One of the most basic parts of the Hindu religion is respect for
Peter> animals, even insects. I would venture to say it's a rare Hindu
Peter> that eats meat. Most would be veggies by nature of their beliefs.
You are confusing Hinduism with Buddhism. Why am I not surprised.
ah
=======================================================================
Would I sell my services to a Third World country? Ask again in six
months.
-- Chief scientist at a Russian nuclear facility,
after the Bush administration dithered on aid to Russia.
Peter R Cook
Quick, before it's too late you must create legislation! You
must pass laws against evil incarnate, me!
I've even eaten Thumper on Easter! A capital offense!
And I eat veal once a week! No flames required, since I am
Satan himself (because I eat meat) your flames will just
be absorbed and make even more powerful! My lust for meat
will grow to new grotesque heights!
Joseph Pavlic
: Pavlic) wrote:
: > Dr. Jai Maharaj (j...@aloha.com) wrote:
: >> Fact City 26 Hormones in Meat = Poison in You
: >>
: >>When hormones were first introduced into livestock production,
: >>after World War II, the meat industry was virtually ecstatic. The
: >>manufacturer of diethylstilbestrol, known as DES, humbly hailed
: >>the event as the most important event in the history of food
: >>production.
: >>Because it produced more fat and more weight in animals, and thus
: >>more profit for the meat industry, DES came to be used on more
: >>than 90% of America's cattle. It was called a "miracle."
: >
: > If DES was such a powerful carcinogenic how come the animals did
: > not die from cancer? If they do die from DES induced cancer why
: > would factory farms what to use it and loose their stock?
: The animals must die form the slaughter first and the greedy
: industry pocket the blood money before the cancer kills.
Cancer causes weight loss and meat from cancerous animals is not
saleable.
: For more information, read the cited references:
Dr. Jai Maharaj
(Kevin M. Hebert) wrote:
> In article <3ivm55$n...@mango.aloha.com>, Dr. Jai Maharaj
> <j...@aloha.com> wrote:
>> A meat-eater's habit hurts others too:
>> * The raw materials needed for food production from livestock
>> exceed all oil, gas and coal consumption. Meat-eaters hurt
>> themselves, their families and others.
>
A detailed 1978 study sponsored by the Department of Interior
and Commerce produced startling figures showing that the value of
raw materials consumed to produce food from livestock is greater
than the value of all oil, gas, and coal consumed in this country.
Please obtain more information from:
- Raw Materials in the United States Economy 1900-1977
Technical Paper 47, Vivian Spencer, U.S. Dept.of Commerce U.S.
Dept. of Interior, Bureau of Mines, pg. 3.
Dr. Jai Maharaj
>> will cut oil imports by over 60% and supply of renewable
>> energy will increase 120-150%. Meat-eaters hurt themselves,
>> their families and others.
>
> This is getting to be a very singsong argument. Prove that a
> vegetarian diet will do as you say. I simply don't believe it.
Economists Fields and Hur report:
A nationwide switch to a diet emphasizing whole grains, fresh
fruits and vegetables -- plus limits on export of nonessential
fatty foods -- would save enough money to cut our imported oil
requirements by over 60 percent. And, the supply of renewable
energy, such as wood and hydroelectric, would invrease 120 to 150
percent.
Here are the sources to look up:
- Hur, Robin and Fields, David, "How Meat Robs America of
Energy," Vegetarian Times, April 1985.
- Robbins, J., "Diet for A New America" Stillpoint Publishing;
1987.
Dr. Jai Maharaj
>> least-efficient plant-based food is 10 times more efficient
>> than producing most-efficient animal-based food. Meat-eaters
>> adversely affect everyone.
>
> Your second statement does not follow directly from the first.
> Yes, it is technically more efficient to raise grain than
Agricultural engineers at Ohio State University compared the
energy costs of producing poultry, pork an other meats with the
energy costs of producing soybeans, corn and other plant foods.
They found that even the *least* efficient plant food is nearly
*ten times* as efficient as the *most* energy efficient animal
food.
Even the best of animal enterprises examined returns only 34.5%
of the investment of fossil energy to us in food energy, whereas
the poorest of the five crop enterprises examined returns 328%.
For more information, please consult:
- Roller, W.L. et al, "Energy Costs of Intensive Livestock
Production," American Society of Agricultural Engineers, June 1975,
St. Joseph, Michigan, paper no. 75-4042, table 7, pg. 14.
Dr. Jai Maharaj
> <j...@aloha.com> wrote:
>> A meat-eater's habit hurts others too:
>> hypertensive and violent.
>
> Now you're being ridiculous. Yes, a meat diet can lead to
> hypertension. But that doesn't mean a meat eater is "more
> violent". Doctor, none of your arguments are making any sense!
One of the conditions violent behavior is associated with is
hypertension. Here is more information about what I posted:
Meat-eaters have higher blood pressure, are more hypertensive
and violent.
Many studies have compared the blood pressure levels of people
who have different diet-styles. Even when the data have been
adjusted to eliminate salt as a variable, the following pattern is
consistent:
Blood Pressure Levels (highest ranked first)
* 1. Meat eaters
* 2. Lacto-ovo vegetarians
* 3. Pure vegetarians
For more information, please consult:
- Burr, M., "Plasma Cholesterol and Blood Pressure in
Vegetarians," Journal of Human Nutrition, 35:437, 1981.
- Sacks, F., "Blood Pressure in Vegetarians," American Journal
of Epidemiology, 100:390, 1974.
- Armstrong, B., ". . . Blood Pressure in Vegetarians,"
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 32:2472, 1979.
- Ophir, O., "Low Blood Pressure in Vegetarians," American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 37:755, 1983.
- Kaplan, N., "Non-Drug Treatment of Hypertension," Annals of
Internal Medicine, 102:359, 1985.
- Editorial, "Lowering Blood Pressure Without Drugs," Lancet,
2:459, 1980.
- Rouse, I., "Blood Pressure Lowering Effect of a Vegetarian
Diet . . .," Lancet, 1:5, 1983.
Cited in "Diet for A New America" by Pulitzer-Prize nominne
John Robbins; Stillpoint; 1987.
Kevin M. Hebert
Steve Connor <St...@vegsoc.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>1) You should try beef here in the UK boys and girls - we've
> got Mad Cow Disease as well as E.Coli 157 and heart disease!
That's why I thank God for the USDA! Mooooooo---AAACK! (thump)
>2) I don't know how abortion popped up, but if you don't like it
> perhaps you should get a vasectomy?
Or a hysterectomy!
>3) Choosing to live a healthier, more humane life is not 'liberal'
> 'commie'- it's just bloody sensible.
Sensible? Are you kidding? I get immense pleasure whenever I eat a thick,
juicy steak or delicious hamburger knowing that somewhere, some cow
DIED A VIOLENT, BLOODY, HORRIBLE death so I could eat of its carcass! Mmm,
hamburgers!!!
-- KMH
Kevin M. Hebert
Craig Jamieson <rc...@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>In many countries McDonalds tries to buy local beef, but in a country
>like Britain where standards are very low with regard to what is fed
>to livestock does McDonalds prefer imported beef?
I'm not sure. Does anyone know? Possibly not.
>Has McDonalds used any Mad Cow Disease beef in the UK? I know they
>would not do it intentionally, but how do they avoid it?
Even the most disgustingly infected piece of meat, when properly cooked,
can be freed of bacteria (of course, if it's already rotted, DON'T EAT
IT!). A cow with a disease, if properly cooked, should be all right,
though it is better to ALWAYS provide for high-grade, healthy meat.
-- KMH
Wadd
Veggie eaters are morons.
Stimpy
Norway?
No Way!
Kublai Ken
On Tue, 28 Feb 1995, Peter R Cook wrote:
> larr...@ils.nwu.edu (larrabee) writes:
>
>
> >> >You're yeucchhhy! And if you support anything that Rush says, than you
> >> >probably are a
> >> >fascist, bigot, racist and oppressor....not to mention a non-"sharp
> >> >thinker." No offense.
> >>
> >> You are the one prejudging all fans of Rush Limbaugh. You are
> >> the bigot sir.
> >>
> >Gee, I guess you're right. You've changed my mind. But I wasn't really
> >prejudging them,
> >I was simply judging them.
>
> The key word is "all" or the implication of "all". Sure some Rush
> fans may be racists and maybe even 100% USDA fascists, but not all
> of them.
In a thread of beef, did we really need to hear that the USDA is now
certifying fascists?
By the by, what sort of wine do you serve with those.....?
--Ken
Who still doesn't drink, anyway
Jesse Crawford
> Dr. Poke Maharaj (j...@mantra.com) wrote:
> : Study the sources of information provided before attempting to
> : ridicule the information.
>
> I questioned, not ridiculed the info. Are you denying that for
> calcium to be utilized by the body one needs vitamin D? Do you
> also deny that the major source of vitamin D for humans is
> sunshine and the Inuit get sunshine for only about 3 months
> out of the year?
Aloha e Joseph,
Those of us who are more familiar with "doc" Poke know better than to
actually try to talk to him. Practically everyone makes the same mistake
at first though, it's a natural enough error. I even asked one of those
really lifelike manniquins in Sears once where the bathroom was, so don't
feel bad.
If the "doctor" seems a little hypersensitive it's because he's accustomed
to being ridiculed here. He expects it, and he enjoys it too, so go ahead
if you want to. I advise you not to make the mistake so many of us have
made by trying to engage him in a rational discussion. The truth is he
doesn't know anything about the role of vitamin D in calcium metabolism
or any of the other points you raised. He got his doctorate with Wheaties
boxtops. It's in bovine emissions. He displays it so proudly in order to
cover his deeply seated inferiority complex. His is a very difficult
case because his feelings of inferiority are so firmly rooted in reality.
Aloha,
jesse
Garreth Edward Ecston
In article <3ivj49$6...@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> drla...@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Derek R. Larson) writes:
>In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.950228...@unicorn.it.wsu.edu>,
>BigWave <ev...@wsunix.wsu.edu> wrote:
>>On 25 Feb 1995, Kevin M. Hebert wrote:>
>>Very well spoken, KMH... I applaud you. When liberals speak, all you
>>need do is find the illogical structure with which they "glue" together
>>their weak arguements and you find contradiction after contradiction.
>>
>>The entire debate over abortion, in the liberal mind, has nothing
>>whatsoever to do with the importance of life (they will turn around and
>>argue the opposite side for saving the whales), they do not like rules
>>which cramp their lifestyle. You will notice how they will create
>>additional propoganda for safe sex, to avoid the true issue which is
>>sexual promescuity and responsibility... not only to themselves and their
>>partner, but to society.
>>
>>When sharp-thinking people point this out, they will indefinately throw a
>>tantrum, calling you a racist, bigot, facist, or oppressor... (especially
>>if you happen to have been born a white, angosaxon male.)
>>
>>Keep up the fight! As Rush says, "We are winning!"
>>
>You know, the level of intelligence expressed in this thread is a pretty
>good example of the level of intelligence of the average reader of the
>groups it's posted to.
What are Pro-Beef sentiments doing here anyway, can't they get their own
newsgroup eg: alt.fan.decomposingcorpses.asfood.
**********************************************************************
* America is the only nation in history which miraculously has gone *
* from barbarism to degeneration without the usual interval of *
* civilization. *
* Georges Clemenceau. *
* ***************************************************************** *
* Stupid asses. *
* Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels on the proletariat, private *
* correspondence. *
* ****************************************************************** *
* This war, like the next war, is a war to end war. *
* David Lloyd George on the first World war. *
* ****************************************************************** *
* ****************************************************************** *
* GARRETH EDWARD ELSTON *
* THE ELECTRONIC FRONTEIR OF THE NOO SARF EFRIKA *
* University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa *
* E-MAIL: 161...@cosmos.wits.ac.za *
* TEL: (011) 716-2824 *
* ****************************************************************** *
**********************************************************************
Dr. Jai Maharaj
wrote:
> Vegeterians are less violent??? Surely you jest! When's the
> last time you've seen overweight, hypertensive American meat
> eaters attacking Sikh temples the way vegetarian Hindus do
> commonly in India?
Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were "attacking Sikh
temples," as you put it.
If you must compare, think about the atomic bombing by Americans
of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I am sure you have knowledge of that
event, don't you?
Jim Bradley
rather that a reply to the newsgroup, I'll try again, so that the thread can
be kept intact (although it has gotten to a point that it may be better off killed).
> On April 9, 1991 the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine,
> a prestigious non-profit organization active in health and research
> policy and based in Washington, D.C.
Sounds like another lobbying organization, or group of physicians that wants
the public to think that they represent the mainstream. Probably to the
Physicians for Social Responsibility, which was just a group of anti-nuclear
physicians. It is so prestegious that I've never heard of them (and I am a
physician). There are several groups that frequently contact me to beg
for money, and I sort them based on the postage that they were mailed with.
This may be why I've never heard of them. Bulk rate gets trashed.
> A 1978 study showed that only
> 9 of the 17 RDA's were met by the typical diet based on the old groups.
Of all of the studies that I've seen cited, you have made reference to one
refereed scientific publication, while all of the others are the type of
publication that I would expect to see at the supermarket checkout
counter. I can find plenty of literature at the local health food store
that would not stand any sort of scientific scrutiny.
> Medical studies prove that a vegetarian diet is easier to
> digest, provides a wider ranger of nutrients and imposes
> fewer burdens and impurities on the body. Vegetarians are
> less susceptible to all the major diseases that afflict
> contemporary humanity, and thus live longer, healthier,
> more productive lives. They have fewer physical
> complaints, less frequent visits to the doctor, fewer
> dental problems and smaller medical bills. Their immune
> system is stronger, their bodies are purer, more refined
> and skin more beautiful.
I don't know about the validity of the "Medical studies" that you refer
to. As I mentioned in my previous reply to you, the two groups it the
United States that you can examine for comparison are the Seventh
Day Adventists and the Mormons. The Adventists are vegetarian, while
the Mormons are not (both of these as generalizations, as there are
sure to be vegetarian Mormons and carnivorous Adventists). Both of
these populations have significantly better health than the average
U.S. population, but not much difference between themselves. Both
groups have high percentages of indivuals that are non-tobacco using
and non-alcohol using. It would seem to me that your healthy
vegetarians are also probably non-smokers and non-drinkers, and
that the attributes that you attribute to a vegetarian life-style are
actually attributed to something else.
> jyotishi, vedic astrologer |_| |_| vedic prediction sciences
As I stated in your email, this really adds credibility to your comments.
Seetoh Wai Keong
: > several years ago that basically stated this. First the gang gave
: > up meat, because it kills animals. Then they gave up eating
: > altogether, because it kills plants. Then they tried not to breathe,
: > because of the millions of bacteria that your body kills.
Unfortunately, those who can't distinguish between cartoons and
real life are still hanging around. The massive crossposting has
elicited responses from some of these characters.
: The entire debate over abortion, in the liberal mind, has nothing
: whatsoever to do with the importance of life (they will turn around &
: argue the opposite side for saving the whales), they do not like rules
: which cramp their lifestyle.
Crossposting has also resulted in people bringing in completely
irrelevant topics into rfv. Who started this crossposting?
seetoh
Kevin M. Hebert
Brandon Hines <Sol...@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu> wrote:
>>I'll admit it. I'm not smart enough to be a Vegetarian. There are too
>>many nutrients in meat that would be hard to come by elsewhere.
>Really? Name them!
1.) Blood.
2.) Bone.
3.) Cholesterol.
4.) Muscle.
5.) Brains.
Mmmm, Hamburgers! Sorry guys, but I'll eat beef till my colon ruptures. If
you don't like it, eat a salad.
-- KMH
dave skinner
> U.S. Physicians Say Meat | Recent Nutritional Research
> Not Necessary, | Affirms Superiority of the
> Actually Harmful | Vegetarian Diet for Humans
<<much drivel deleted>>
> * Based on a 1991 article in Hinduism Today *
If you would be honest and admit that your position is based upon religion and
not upon true health issues, I'd be much more respectful of your position.
RIEGLER, MONICA L.
>Jesse Crawford <je...@lehua.ilhawaii.net> wrote
>many lies, insults and deceptive statements. He
>is a shame to the community here in Hawaii and his
>fraud has been proven and exposed many times on
>the Net.
I don't know if his fraud has been proven and exposed many times on the
internet. I think the only shame of the state of Hawaii would be you, "Poke".
>*-=Om Shanti=-* Jai Maharaj>
adios, Dr.
Monica Riegler
mori...@zebu.cvm.msu.edu
Peter Brewer
>. Fact City 8 Beef -> Colon Cancer
>
> of colon cancer is up to ten times the rate of non-beef-eating
> cultures of Asia and the developing world.
>
Which won't matter much because most Asian cultures are a bunch of
chiminey's heading for a wonderful case of large cell carcinoma as their
lungs fill with that wonderful product brought to you by Phillip Morris.
-- peter brewer
Peter Brewer
>In article <YEgLle1W...@lehua.ilhawaii.net>,
>Jesse Crawford <je...@lehua.ilhawaii.net> wrote
>many lies, insults and deceptive statements. He
>is a shame to the community here in Hawaii and his
>fraud has been proven and exposed many times on
>the Net.
>
>
Well, Doc he is alot funnier than you are. Besides, he has been blessed
with the mystic amulet by Dr. Stephen Strange Master of Mystic Arts and
so is now a much better authority on these things than you.
-- peter brewer
Nostradamus: the greatest vedic predictor ever; which makes sense given
how much the Q continuum likes beings from France. ;-)
Dr. Jai Maharaj
When hormones were first introduced into livestock production,
after World War II, the meat industry was virtually ecstatic. The
manufacturer of diethylstilbestrol, known as DES, humbly hailed
the event as the most important event in the history of food
production.
Because it produced more fat and more weight in animals, and thus
more profit for the meat industry, DES came to be used on more
than 90% of America's cattle. It was called a "miracle."
even minute amounts of this "miracle" were not always fully able
to appreciate its wonders.
They exhibited symptoms of impotence, infertility, gynecomastia
(elevated and tender breasts), or changes in their voice register.
Then it was discovered that DES causes cancer even in the smallest
doses imaginable. Lab animals developed cancer from daily doses of
the hormone as low as one-quarter of a hundred-millionth of an
ounce. FDA biochemist Jacqueline Verret reported:
Researchers from the National Cancer Institute assured
Congressmen that it might be possible for only one molecule of
DES in the 340,000,000,000,000 present in a quarter pound of
beef liver to trigger human cancer.
After a fiercely fought political battle, it was finally made
illegal to administer DES to livestock. But the meat industry
simply shrugged their shoulders and carried on as usual. Several
years after the ban went into effect, the FDA discovered how much
respect the industry had for the law of the land. No less than
half-a-million cattle were found to have been illegally implanted
with DES.
Today, many factory farms in the country continue to use DES
illegally. Others have simply switched to other sex hormones on
the market which have the same effects and contain many of the
same substances as DES. These hormones, such as Steer-oid, Ralgro,
Compudose and Synovex, are used in virtually every feedlot in the
country.
-- Schell, O., "Modern Meat"
Vintage Books, Random House, 1985, pgs. 197, 198, 254, 257-268
Disturbances in Mice," Science, 122:3171, 1955, pgs. 643-644
Health," Simon and Schuster, 1974, pg. 170
Stillpoint Publishing, Walpole, N.H., 1987, pgs. 312-313
*-=Om Shanti=-* Jai Maharaj
jai maharaj |_|_|_|_| mantra corporation
jyotishi, vedic astrologer |_| |_| vedic prediction sciences
Dr. Jai Maharaj
>: In article <3j1vvc$3...@crl8.crl.com>,
>: Joseph Pavlic <co...@crl.com> wrote:
>:>Dr. Jai Maharaj (j...@mantra.com) wrote:
>:>: In article <3j0rh6$8...@crl4.crl.com>, co...@crl.com (Joseph Pavlic)
>:>: wrote:
>:>: > Vegeterians are less violent??? Surely you jest! When's the
>:>: > last time you've seen overweight, hypertensive American meat
>:>: > eaters attacking Sikh temples the way vegetarian Hindus do
>:>: > commonly in India?
>:>
>:>: Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were "attacking Sikh
>:>: temples," as you put it.
>:>I find it hard to believe that you are not aware
>:>of Vegetarian Hindu attacks on Sikhs . . .
>
>:I ask again: Substantiate your claim that vegetarians were
>
You avoided your task again, that of substantiating your claim.
Your claim falls unsubstantiated. You have failed. Also, if
you must compare -- think of the atomic bombing by Americans of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Jason P. Sorens
: In article <794052...@vegsoc.demon.co.uk>,
: Steve Connor <St...@vegsoc.demon.co.uk> wrote:
: >1) You should try beef here in the UK boys and girls - we've
: > got Mad Cow Disease as well as E.Coli 157 and heart disease!
: That's why I thank God for the USDA! Mooooooo---AAACK! (thump)
The USDA?!? It's a bunch of bureaucrats who don't know the first thing
about meat inspection. It should be privatized into a ratings
organization instead of a regulatory agency.
: >2) I don't know how abortion popped up, but if you don't like it
: > perhaps you should get a vasectomy?
: Or a hysterectomy!
Autoflame grade: A.
: >3) Choosing to live a healthier, more humane life is not 'liberal'
: > 'commie'- it's just bloody sensible.
: Sensible? Are you kidding? I get immense pleasure whenever I eat a thick,
: juicy steak or delicious hamburger knowing that somewhere, some cow
: DIED A VIOLENT, BLOODY, HORRIBLE death so I could eat of its carcass! Mmm,
: hamburgers!!!
I prefer the Lone Star Steakhouse's steak filet mignon. Of course, I'm
on a higher level than hamburgers.
: -- KMH
--
Laissez faire, |jso...@liberty.uc.wlu.edu
|alt.flame,rec.music.christian,talk.politics.libertarian
Jason P Sorens |
"It's raining blood again, deep in the halls of shame/ Shadows breathe
at night/ Lost in the dark, they call my name"
--Die Happy
Jon Costa
>
>Mmmm, Hamburgers! Sorry guys, but I'll eat beef till my colon ruptures. If
Sorry?!! No need to be sorry to us, are we supposed to care? Just curious,
do you smoke too?
>you don't like it, eat a salad.
Thanks, don't mind if I do.
-- Jon
Kevin M. Hebert
> Last year in Hawaii, we started perhaps the nation's only
>govenment-sponsored campaign to include more plant-based foods in
>our diet.
GUMMINT! Well, if Uncle Sam says do it, I'll get right on the stick! Remember,
kids, this is the same gummint that brought you Somalia and Socks.
> The taxpayer-funded nutritional education program targets kids and
>parents alike in our public school system.
Infrared or Optical scope?
> What is more, the Physicians Commitee for Responsible Medicine,
>Washington, D.C., has concluded that not only is an animal-based
>diet unnecessary, but is actually harmful.
Yeah. But who cares? Mmm, hamburgers!
> The benefits of the healthy, plant-based food culture contrast
>sharply the terrorism the animal-eating habit wages on our body,
>others and the environment. That is a future we can all live with.
Maybe you, but not me! I need food from the four food groups every day:
blood, brains, bones, and beef!
Today in Bio lab, we cut off the head of a frog so we could dissect it while
it was still fresh! Its heart kept beating until the end of class (when
we cut it off the body. Amazingly, it kept going for a while even then!).
I love frog's legs.
-- KMH
Lizabeth
>
> * Meat-eaters have higher blood pressure, are more
>treatment. Everyone is forced to pay the price of violence and
>crime. Meat-eaters hurt themselves, their families and others.
Dr, you use this same research and treatment argument so many times that
I wonder if you understand it at all.
1) Regardless of meat-eating, this research would continue. The
diseases you cite are not tied only to meat eating. Perhaps if
meat-eating is causing greater outbreaks of these diseases (can you prove
this, by the way?) it will give researchers greater cause to work on
them. I will be going into medical research myself, and know that if
there is not a public demand for the cure of a disease, it will not be
researched. Would you rather the numerous afflictions you cited be
labeled 'orphan diseases' which are not researched unless a private
indivudial or company is willing to pay the large amounts of money
necessary for the job to be carried out?
2) Aside from the desired outcome of medical research (a cure or
treatment for the affliction being studied) there is sometimes an outcome
which was not predicted and benefits mankind in other ways. Asprin, for
instance, was manufactured originally for pain relief. It was then
discovered that asprin also works as a blood thinner. Asprin is now used
as a prevenitive medication for heart attacks and strokes. Without
'public funds for research and treatment' this benefit and others would
be unknown to us today
Besides, what with American politics being what they are, if the money
was not being put into medical research for these "meat-eaters diseases"
the money would probably be put into something like more guns and more
bombs. Is that worth eating tofu everyday?
Also, how does medical research hurt meat-eaters, their family, and others?
lizabeth
none of this is medical advice
Randall H. Thatcher
In a previous article, p...@world.std.com (Peter R Cook) says:
[blah blah blah]
>>Yes Hindus did attack these places. However, I never saw anything about
>>them being vegetarians. On what do you base this claim?
>
> One of the most basic parts of the Hindu religion is respect for
> animals, even insects. I would venture to say it's a rare Hindu
> that eats meat. Most would be veggies by nature of their beliefs.
Most of the hindus i know at my school eat meat. They all wear leather.
in fact, i know of a hare krishna kid who eats burgers (but his folx don't
know). In theory, hindus don't eat meat, but i don't think that's always
the case. i guess in theory christians don't commit adultery, so why do so
many cheat on spouses???
randy
--
RANDALL H. THATCHER >It's better to die on your feet <
rh...@po.CWRU.edu > than to live on your knees. <
CWRU Electrical Eng. -Midnight Oil from
VegPhlayva InfoZine "Power and the Passion"
Dr. Jai Maharaj
and Harming the Environment
The U.S. livestock population consumes enough grain and
soybeans to feed over 5 times the entire human population of the
country.
We feed these animals more than 80% of the corn we grow, and
over 95% of the oats.
By cycling our grain through livestock, we end up with only
10% as many calories available to feed human mouths as would be
available if we ate the grain directly.
Less than half the harvested agricultural acreage in the U.S.
is used to grow food for people's direct consumption. Most of it
is used to grow livestock feed -- a drastically inefficient use of
our agricultural land.
For every 16 pounds of grain and soybeans fed to beef cattle,
Americans get back only 1 pound as meat on their plates. The other
15 are inaccessible, most of it turned into manure which goes on
to pollute the rivers, lakes, wells and springs.
We also lose 90% of the protein we invest as feed in our
livestock. Beef is the least efficient -- we lose 94% of the
protein. Dairy cattle are the most "efficient" with a 78% loss. We
lose 88% when it comes to pigs and 83% of the protein investment
in poultry is lost.
The solution is simple: switch to vegetarian food --
something we are admirably equipped to digest.
-- Bralove, Mary, "The Food Crisis: the Shortages May Pit the
'Have Nots' Against the 'Haves'"
Wall Street Journal, October 3, 1974, page 20
-- Maidenburg, H.J., "The Livestock Population Explosion"
New York Times, July 1, 1973, page 1 - Finance Section
-- Brody, Jane E., "The Quest for Protein," from "Give Us This Day"
Arno Press, 1975, page 222
-- Lappe, Frances Moore, "Diet For A Small Planet," Tenth
Anniversary Edition, Ballantine Books, New York, 1982, page 69
-- Altschul, Aaron, "Proteins: Their Chemistry and Politics"
Basic Books, 1965, page 264
-- Doyring, Folke, "Soybeans"
Scientific American, February 1974
-- "The World Food Problem," a report by the President's Science
Advisory Committee, Volume II, May 1967
-- "Fact Sheet," Food Animals Concern Trust
Issue Number 26, November 1982, Chicago
-- Robbins, John, "Diet For A New America"
Stillpoint Publishing, Walpole, N.H., 1987, pages 350-351
Snohomish
Am I the only one who seems to not understand how it relates to the Northwest?
Jerry Marceau
> Instead PCRM recommends a "New Four Food Groups." They are: 1.
> fruits; 2. grains; 3. vegetables; and 4. legumes.
Where the hell is the dairy group? I can understand that a meat-free diet
can be healthy, but I find it very difficult to cut out dairy products and
maintain proper protein intake as well as calcium. You are full of it if
you say that consuming skim milk for your protein/calcium is unhealthy.
--
Jerry Marceau j...@christa.unh.edu
Computing and Information Services 201 Congreve Hall
The University of New Hampshire
Matthew Reynolds
: co...@crl.com (Joseph Pavlic) wrote:
: > Dr. Jai Maharaj (j...@mantra.com) wrote:
: >: In article <3j2vsf$i...@nic-nac.CSU.net>,
: >: asa...@cs9sun.calstatela.edu (And) wrote:
: >:> Eskimos in the freezing northern polar regions have been living
: >:> exclusively on seal meat since the first humans moved into that
: >:> region. . . .
Yep ... of course whether or not you can live on the stuff in a taco is
debatable. It says it is ground beef but I didn't think beef could be
squeezes out of a toothpaste tube.
: > : >: The excess protein in the Eskimo meat diet is responsible
: >: for
: >: the very high incidence of osteoporosis among them:
: >: ". . . are the native Eskimos. If osteoporosis were
: >: a
: >: calcium deficiency disease it would be unheard of among these
: >: people. They have the highest dietary calcium intake of any
: >: people
: >: in the world -- more than 2,000 mg. a day from fish bones.[53]
: >
Hey now that is a possibility.... maybe its bone meal. I mean you can
make jello out of bone meal, right?
: > Doc, don't you know that calcium
. . .
: Study the sources of information provided before attempting to
: ridicule the information.
I think I'll go run to the border and do some research right now.
: *-=Om Shanti=-* Jai Maharaj
Paul N. Brothers ; CHEM
: In article <3j5iov$t...@felix.seas.gwu.edu>,
: Kevin M. Hebert <kmhe...@seas.gwu.edu> wrote:
: [Snipage]
: >
: >Mmmm, Hamburgers! Sorry guys, but I'll eat beef till my colon ruptures. If
: Sorry?!! No need to be sorry to us, are we supposed to care? Just curious,
: do you smoke too?
Yes, Kevin is a veritable smoking hulk, however it is due
to his being incinerated on a regular basis.
PNB.
NEFARiOUS
alt.flame, and other newsgroups, was successful!
clever.
Strawberry Shortcake
> Newgroups: rec.food.veg, alt.mcdonalds, alt.flame,
> alt.politics.usa.republican, alt.food.taco-bell, alt.food.mcdonalds,
> alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.culture.oregon, alt.agriculture.misc
> Subject: Re: Pro BEEF
>
> Whoever started this thread and posted on alt.mcdonalds, rec.food.veg,
> alt.flame, and other newsgroups, was successful!
>
> clever.
Well, clever is not exactly the word I'd use for whoever
posted about BEEF to the TB newsgroup, because the
discussions being had about ProBeef and AntiBeef are
OUT OF CONTROL and more than a little bit petty and
ridiculous. If you all are so obsessed with beef, why
don't you make an alt.food.we-love-to-fucking-write-about-
BEEF-BEEF-BEEF newsgroup and STOP POSTING TO THE
TACO BELL NEWSGROUP.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Jen *}--- "the grass is always greener when
the shoe is on the other foot"
Joseph Pavlic
: >>>>> Joseph Pavlic writes:
: Joseph> Dr. Jai Maharaj (j...@mantra.com) wrote:
: Yes Hindus did attack these places. However, I never saw anything about
: them being vegetarians. On what do you base this claim?
On the Hindu Rule of Ahimsa.
: ah
: =======================================================================
: We have engaged in a very -- a very -- an extraordinarily broad
: exercise of diplomacy here ... I don't know what -- what it means
: fully.
: -- Ex President George Bush.
Joseph Pavlic
:
: When hormones were first introduced into livestock production,
: after World War II, the meat industry was virtually ecstatic. The
: manufacturer of diethylstilbestrol, known as DES, humbly hailed
: the event as the most important event in the history of food
: production.
:
: Because it produced more fat and more weight in animals, and thus
: more profit for the meat industry, DES came to be used on more
: than 90% of America's cattle. It was called a "miracle."
If DES was such a powerful carcinogenic how come the animals did
not die from cancer? If they do die from DES induced cancer
why would factory farms what to use it and loose their stock?
Joseph Pavlic
: Joseph Pavlic <co...@crl.com> wrote:
: >Does this mean that . . .
: You avoided your task again, that of substantiating your claim.
: Your claim falls unsubstantiated. You have failed.
You claim of a lack of knowledge of warfare between Hindus and
Muslims and Hindus and Sihks is not believable. It amounts to
asking an African American to prove their claim that slavery existed.
You shatter your integrity by feigning ignorance.
: Also, if
: you must compare -- think of the atomic bombing by Americans of
: Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
We already done this but it appears you found it convenient to forget.
I'll repeat it again and see if you will choose to ignore it again.
The Japanese were the aggressors in that war. They were the ones who
attacked the US. Also it is no secret that the Japanese eat much less
meat that the Americans so your theory is proven false. In this
anology it is obvious that the more meat one eats the less
aggressive one becomes.
:
: *-=Om Shanti=-* Jai Maharaj
Joseph Pavlic
: asa...@cs9sun.calstatela.edu (And) wrote:
: > Eskimos in the freezing northern polar regions have been living
: > exclusively on seal meat since the first humans moved into that
: > region. . . .
: The excess protein in the Eskimo meat diet is responsible for
: the very high incidence of osteoporosis among them:
: ". . . are the native Eskimos. If osteoporosis were a
: calcium deficiency disease it would be unheard of among these
: people. They have the highest dietary calcium intake of any people
: in the world -- more than 2,000 mg. a day from fish bones.[53]
Doc, don't you know that calcium without Vitamin D is more or
less useless. The major natural source of Vitamin D for the
human body is sunshine. Sunshine is something that the Inuit
do not get for 9 months out of the year.
I am curious what area of study did you receive your doctorate for?
Paul N. Brothers ; CHEM
: Eskimos in the freezing northern polar regions have been living exclusively
: of thousands of years, centuries ago, eskimos would "hunt" by standing for
Hundreds of thousands of years? Your timing is a bit off. No
more than about ten thousand years, if that much. Check a text
on archeological anthropology.
PNB.
: hours staring at a hole in the ice until a seal stuck it's nose through to
: breathe, then they would spear it.
: The meat provided food, the skins clothes, the oil heat, and they were
: able to survive.
: Need this argument thread about meat to continue??
BigWave
> In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.950228...@unicorn.it.wsu.edu>,
> BigWave <ev...@wsunix.wsu.edu> wrote:
> >On 25 Feb 1995, Kevin M. Hebert wrote:>
> >Very well spoken, KMH... I applaud you. When liberals speak, all you
> >need do is find the illogical structure with which they "glue" together
> >their weak arguements and you find contradiction after contradiction.
> >
> >The entire debate over abortion, in the liberal mind, has nothing
> >whatsoever to do with the importance of life (they will turn around and
> >argue the opposite side for saving the whales), they do not like rules
> >which cramp their lifestyle. You will notice how they will create
> >additional propoganda for safe sex, to avoid the true issue which is
> >sexual promescuity and responsibility... not only to themselves and their
> >partner, but to society.
> >
> >When sharp-thinking people point this out, they will indefinately throw a
> >tantrum, calling you a racist, bigot, facist, or oppressor... (especially
> >if you happen to have been born a white, angosaxon male.)
> >
> >Keep up the fight! As Rush says, "We are winning!"
> >
>
>
> You know, the level of intelligence expressed in this thread is a pretty
> good example of the level of intelligence of the average reader of the
> groups it's posted to.
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Derek R. Larson * "We're lacking in humor, a little smug,
> drla...@Indiana.edu * considering ourselves to be among the
> * favored few." -Terrence O'Donnell on Oregonians
You then, Sir, must be an "average" reader? How else unless you consider
yourself below average, or above average. I would be apt to argue
against above average...
David W.
BigWave
> > When sharp-thinking people point this out, they will indefinately throw a
> > tantrum, calling you a racist, bigot, facist, or oppressor... (especially
> > if you happen to have been born a white, angosaxon male.)
> >
> > Keep up the fight! As Rush says, "We are winning!"
> >
>
> You're yeucchhhy! And if you support anything that Rush says, than you
> probably are a
> fascist, bigot, racist and oppressor....not to mention a non-"sharp
> thinker." No offense.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> a white, ANGLO-saxon male.
Isn't it fascists, bigots, racists and oppressors that come up with these
slanderous terms?????
Btw, if you think that murder is in any way intolerable... then you too
just might support something that Rush says... which would tend to point
your own finger at yourself.
Oh, and no offence taken...
David W.