Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

[DoYouKubuntu]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

I've supported Peta for decades and will continue to do so. They, more than any other animal-oriented organization, have made animal-related issues known about by their very IN YOUR FACE methods. Sometimes, that's what it takes to publicize issues that many people would prefer to ignore. I also support the ASPCA and HSUS, but Peta was instrumental in my eventual epiphany about what a hypocrite I was. It was their publications that first got me really aware of animal abuse in the meat industry, and I'm glad. I had NO IDEA that "meat" animals are treated as horrifically as they are and--as with most people who buy their meat neatly packaged in the supermarket--I never gave any thought at all to how it ended up neatly packaged in the supermarket. I assumed there were laws protecting animals from abuse in the meat industry. I was wrong. While it's perfectly legal to drag a "downed" cow off a truck, across cement, and into the slaughterhouse, dragging a dog behind a car [which unfortunately does happen] is punishable by prison time. See how little LOGICAL sense that makes?

I, among others, will continue to eat what I like.

That's certainly your right. All I would ask is that when you dig in to that slab of once living, sentient being, you give some thought to the suffering it endured.

We may disagree on the "need" for animal-based proteins, but I will respect your opinion.

Well, facts are facts. *shrug*

[bsniadajewski]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

There probably are laws protecting animals, but unfortunately they are ignored in the areas those more unethical farms exist. Dragging a cow is definitely more unethical that if they just walked the cattle into the slaughterhouse.

I was going to say that the reason some species are/were used as pets and other as food was because of their usefulness to us. In Ancient Egypt, maybe pre-Dynastic, cats were used to keep the house(s) clean of mice and other small rodents, and from ther they (cats) attained god-like status in the Pharaonic religion. Dogs, becausde they were territorial (like wolves), were employed as guard animals to keep out intruders, as well as helping in hunting.

Now I won't get you started on fur (well OK maybe I did ). Animal hides were, and still are, used for keeping warm in the colder climates as our human ancestors spread into and across Eurasia and into the Americas, though they were unnecessary in equatorial Africa. Now, you can that furs have become unnecessary because of our advances using cotton for clothing, but there are areas in the extreme north where furs are the only options to stay warm.

[Qqmike]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

There's no question that humans do not need any animal protein.

The best you might get is the B12 argument (supplementation there, as older adults have a difficult time absorbing it anyway, regardless of what they eat). And maybe some discussion about omega-3. But, as I said, our fish is highly contaminated with concentrated toxins. Walnuts, flaxseed, plants, avocados work.

The BIG, heavy strong gorilla, as well as rhino, hippo, giraffe, and elephant ... fairly big, strong guys, eating only vegetables/plants.

Which has more protein: 100 calories of broccoli or 100 calories of steak? (Hint: it's the green stuff.) Hmmm, what does the cow eat ... ?

[DoYouKubuntu]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

Thank you, Qqmike, for your continued valuable input. I feel a bit of a loner here!

[SteveRiley]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

Which has more protein: 100 calories of broccoli or 100 calories of steak? (Hint: it's the green stuff.) Hmmm, what does the cow eat ... ?

What? You're mixing your units here, as if they're interchangeable. A calorie is a measure of enery. Food energy comes from a variety of sources, protein being one. 100 grams of protein -- regardless of the source -- provide an energy density of 4 kcal/g.

And if you're suggesting that humans should match their dietary habits to those of cows, I remind you that cows consume regurgitated food.

[bsniadajewski]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

Thank you, Steve. At least I have some help here as well. Maybe we can bring in Woody to help make this more interesting than it already is. Woody, your thoughts?

[DoYouKubuntu]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

Which has more protein: 100 calories of broccoli or 100 calories of steak? (Hint: it's the green stuff.) Hmmm, what does the cow eat ... ?

What? You're mixing your units here, as if they're interchangeable. A calorie is a measure of enery. Food energy comes from a variety of sources, protein being one. 100 grams of protein -- regardless of the source -- provide an energy density of 4 kcal/g.

Steve, darling, one of us is having a brain fart. Qq is talking about how much protein is contained in 100 calories of broccoli vs 100 calories of steak. This isn't a trick question, like "which weighs more, a pound of marshmallows or a pound of bricks?" In other words, if you eat a 100 calorie serving of broccoli you'll get more protein than if you ate a 100 calorie serving of steak.

And if you're suggesting that humans should match their dietary habits to those of cows, I remind you that cows consume regurgitated food.

Yes, which allows them to utilize otherwise indigestible substances. Pretty cool, if you ask me!

[SteveRiley]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

Steve, darling, one of us is having a brain fart. Qq is talking about how much protein is contained in 100 calories of broccoli vs 100 calories of steak. This isn't a trick question, like "which weighs more, a pound of marshmallows or a pound of bricks?" In other words, if you eat a 100 calorie serving of broccoli you'll get more protein than if you ate a 100 calorie serving of steak.

Alright, let's do the numbers. According to the charts on the web site Fat Secret, 100 grams of broccoli contains 2.82 grams of protein and 34 calories. 100 grams of steak sandwich contains 30.33 grams of protein and 459 calories. Normalizing each of these to 100 calories results in 294 grams of broccoli with 8.29 grams of protein and 21.8 grams of steak sandwich with 6.61 grams of protein. So yes, your claim appears correct. Converting to Imperial units, that's 10.4 ounces of broccoli or 0.77 ounce of steak.

I don't believe I've ever consumed a single 0.77 ounce portion of meat in my life, so let's multiply by a factor of 10. To obtain 1000 calories from a steak sandwich, I'd have to eat 218 grams or 7.7 ounces. To obtain 1000 calories from broccoli, I'd have to eat 2940 grams or 104 ounces or 6.5 pounds.

While I realize that popular literature frequently does this, scientifically it makes no sense to use a unit of measurement of energy to compare quantities of food. That's like saying, "I'm going to put 100 horsepower-hours of gasoline in my car." Sitting on the shelf (or in the freezer), the energy in food is useless. So talk of "nutrient density" is a futile exercise. You have to burn or otherwise consume the food to extract energy from metabolization.

"Nutrition" struggles to be accepted as a science, possibly because it misunderstands how to apply the basics of chemistry and physics. Micahel Pollan had a fair amount to say about this in his 2007 article Unhappy Meals.

[Snowhog]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

Or simply put: "Figures never lie, but Liars always figure."

[woodsmoke]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

Maybe we can bring in Woody to help make this more interesting than it already is. Woody, your thoughts?

Wellll.....I actually wrote several posts but deleted them because:
a) they were somewhat icing on the cake
b) they went against some of the entrenched ideas on both, or the many, sides
c) the thread is going great so I was just enjoying it....

kind of amazing how the threads here just wander around, but always seem to end up being interesting!

But a couple of comments:

a) protein and animal protein are the same....well yess....but there are other associated chemicals that are involved and it is a dicey thing to say that "just this" or "just that" is all that one needs.

b) evolutionarily, it seems that we were first adapted for eating meat and then had some mutations which allowed the eating of plant materials, the evidence of that being that a severe illness can trigger the "off" switch for our mutation which makes us NOT allergic to gluten....although there is argument about this.

But, to the point of (b). Since I would say that "many if not most" "vegans/vegetarians" are not "religious" then they probably at least "accept" the idea of evolution. If so then they are flying in the face of their "acceptance" of the requirements of evolutionary descent, unless one argues that one has moved "beyond" "mere" adaptational evolution(which is a valid argument, btw).

But one concommitant of being vegetarian was, before the widespread use of Quinoa, was the use of manufactured chemicals that provided the missing amino acid(s) that are not found in "previous" plant materials which would seem to create somewhat of a contradiction in philosophical outlook, since "many" vegetarians are also anti-big pharma...

For me personally, if I eat a lot of "red meat" then I get swollen lower legs, simple as that, so I tend to eat mostly yard walkers and denizens of the briny deep.

One huge change that I have made in my lifestyle is, as I stated elsewhere, a move to "high end" Italian food, with little beef, mostly chicken, shrimp, scallops, veggies, pasta etc. (but not a lot of pasta).

I have always eaten a lot of "fruit" and cheese, but have increased the amounts, especially as snacks.

One really UNforseen result of that is that my gumline has "improved" a whole "decimal" and I find that there is almost none of the "white goop" between my teeth and I ascribe it, as does my dentist, almost all to the almost total lack of consumption of "white bread".

Not that I don't like white bread, I've eaten it for decades, but I've moved to mostly "rye"(german mainly) and "dark breads" and some "hard french baguette" type breads(again dark). And, I made this move not from any great medical or philosophical reason but quite simply because I like the flavour.

I became enamoured of eating rye bread and swiss cheese when I first watched Shirley Temple in Heidi, when her grandad made it on the "hearthstone" in their cabin. Loved it at first sight/taste and never stopped!

[img width=400 height=336]http://bookeats.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/shirley-temple-in-heidi-shirley-temple-6178458-450-379.jpg[/img]

So, I really am at sixes and sevens on the whole meat/not meat thing, but will say that although there are arguments for each side of the debate there are also arguments against.

A student put the "plight" of the animal something like this: (it is not a quote, just my rememberance of what she said

"Animals supposedly don't know when they are going to die, whereas humans do. So, would you rather live your life being fed well, being medicated so you don't have any parasites, etc. being given a relatively nice place to live. That is not in the freezing cold or summer heat, on concrete with no mud or pests or animals to try to eat you. And then be killed by a bullet to the head.

Or...would you rather have to walk miles to get to water, eat green grass during the summer or brown dead grass in the winter. Freeze in the winter, roast in the summer and then have to run from predators but finally be pulled down and eaten alive. And the same basically goes for the predator.

Given that they don't know the time of their death, maybe what "we" think is humane and just is just ....pain to the animal and what we consider inhumane... a bullet to the head, is really not that bad after a comfortable life."

But, given that....my grandad and I, along with a bunch of other people started one of the few "hunting and fishing clubs" back in the fifties that is still operational.

And, I killed and "skinned/cleaned" more animals of a variety of types over about a ten year period than I want to remember, and we did it for "meat" not for sport.

But, after a while, it occurred to me that it was a lot CHEAPER to just go and buy the meat, starting in the late sixties, and especially in the beginning seventies.

And besides, I was just tired of it. So, not for any great philosophical reason, I started to go to the store for "meat", to photography for "shooting land animals and birds" and "catch and release" for fish.

So...like I said, I'm at sixes and sevens on the whole thing and am not going to take a side.

woodveryambiguoussmoke

[bsniadajewski]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

I myself don't consume much meat either. Chicken, turkey (ususally sliced), and a little of beef (in various forms) and ham are pretty much all I'll have. Occasionally I'll enjoy some pasta, usually spaghetti or (beef) casserole, but usually it's just sandwiches for lunch, nothing even close to ~3/4 pounds as SR alluded to earlier. Other than that, bananas and cereals.

I was going to give a comeback to DYK's list of well-known vegetarians, but I could only come up with one name, though I may disagree withhis politics:


Ted Nugent

He's a rocker. He's a hunter (on his own land). And last time I checked, he's "aalive and well, still raisin' hell."

[Qqmike]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

Woody, your dark breads (rye, pumpernickel) are better for your blood sugar (have a lower glycemic index) than white bread. And, as I've posted elsewhere before, whole wheat bread has the SAME glycemic index as does white bread unless the WW is stone ground (for obvious reasons).

SteveRiley, "To obtain 1000 calories from broccoli, I'd have to eat 2940 grams or 104 ounces or 6.5 pounds."

That is the whole point! Ha! Or, at least one important health issue of eating vegetarian/vegan. You can eat a lot on a vegan diet, fill up, eat all you want, be satisfied, not over-do the calories, not gain excess weight around the waist, AND have a high-nutrition meal. 100 cal brocolli = 12 ounces of food; 100 cal ground sirloin = 1 ounce food. As I said above, if you have a problem gaining weight, on a vegan diet, you may have to add in some healthy fats--walnuts, seeds, nuts in general, avocados, flax, etc. Or, go 80-90% and allow some fish (or some meat).

As for primitive humans, pretty clear that they FIRST ate plants and fruits, isn't it? Then, to survive, they ate whatever they could get their hands on. Diets of primitive people and primates is largely plant-based. You might dig up the works of one of the few nutritional anthropologists in the world, Dr. Katherine Milton, U. Cal at Berkeley, as she has done work on this.

No question about it, we don't need to eat meat. In fact, we have a society literally killing itself (big business that it supports) with major diseases, many of them caused by or made worse by meat products (saturated fats, cholesterol, animal protein, possibly some bad sugars (as in milk))--heart disease, cancer, diabetes (and low-fat diets have been shown to improve A1C tests on diabetics). If you are eating a lot of meat, it's because you want to because you like it or because of food addiction. You are not eating it because you need the (very little) nutrition it contains. The trade-off cost (for the enjoyment) is, of course, risks to health and possibly longevity. But if you must eat some meat, the most important variable in the diet-and-health equation is that your diet is primarily plant-based for its high nutrition (antioxidant, phytochemicals, vitamins, minerals) and low-fat content. Before adding more meat, I would first try to add more healthy fats (nuts, seeds, avocados).

As for science, I mentioned the popular Fuhrman book. He's compiled the science, in major journals, from leading research universities. The book is a good place to start as it is readable and organizes the subject matter linked to specific research citations.

[Qqmike]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

Above, Before adding more meat, I would first try to add more healthy fats (nuts, seeds, avocados) ... and olives/olive oil would be another.

It's interesting how people boast about avoiding meat except for "some chicken" (maybe white meat). To that I say, chicken is where chicken fat comes from! Fat is fat when it comes to effects on the body (e.g., blocking insulin receptors), although saturated fat is a real killer. Animal meat is where animal fats come from! Interesting, too, how the animal eats too much, stores the excess as fat, then we eat that meat, eating much of the oils and fats the animal stored after over-eating.

Know a gal who worked in nursing homes for much of her life. She started in the kitchens. She has a habit of reminding me of one of their secrets, that if I want to make a dish taste better (like steamed broccoli), you simply add some fat to it! She's right, of course. (Steam it in water with some olive oil and garlic, for example, or serve it with a pork chop.) We are addicted to the notion that food should taste a certain way. And, hey, let's not beat around the bush about what makes food taste better for most Americans: fats, sugars, and salt. Though some people have trained their taste buds to actually taste the real food underneath it all, like the natural salt in broccoli.

[eggbert]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

To obtain 1000 calories from broccoli, I'd have to eat 2940 grams or 104 ounces or 6.5 pounds.

Ugh broccoli...

[DoYouKubuntu]

Re: Sacre Bleu! France willingly eats McD's..

I've got some personal issues going on here right now--my mom fell [again] and while she doesn't appear to have broken anything, she's quite uncomfortable. Depending on how things progress, I may take her in for x-rays. So I'm a bit distracted at the moment and don't feel like responding in my usual verbose manner to all the comments. For right now, I'm just going to address this:

A student put the "plight" of the animal something like this: (it is not a quote, just my rememberance of what she said

"Animals supposedly don't know when they are going to die, whereas humans do. So, would you rather live your life being fed well, being medicated so you don't have any parasites, etc. being given a relatively nice place to live. That is not in the freezing cold or summer heat, on concrete with no mud or pests or animals to try to eat you. And then be killed by a bullet to the head.
...
Given that they don't know the time of their death, maybe what "we" think is humane and just is just ....pain to the animal and what we consider inhumane... a bullet to the head, is really not that bad after a comfortable life."

Please show me how the REALITIES of factory farming match up with the above.

Calf chained and confined in a tiny crate so its flesh will be proper "veal":

[img width=400 height=268]http://www.smartassproducts.com/images/kubuntuforums/cow12.jpg[/img]

Cows in their comfy living quarters:

[img width=400 height=288]http://www.smartassproducts.com/images/kubuntuforums/cow13.jpg[/img]

Cow strung up by its legs, fully awake and conscious:

[img width=230 height=400]http://www.smartassproducts.com/images/kubuntuforums/cow22.jpg[/img]

Assembly line of awake, conscious cows hanging upside down:

[img width=283 height=400]http://www.smartassproducts.com/images/kubuntuforums/cow23.jpg[/img]

A fully awake, aware, conscious, sentient being having its throat slit unanesthetized:

[img width=290 height=400]http://www.smartassproducts.com/images/kubuntuforums/cow24.jpg[/img]

Speaks for itself...

[img width=266 height=400]http://www.smartassproducts.com/images/kubuntuforums/cow25.jpg[/img]

Can't wait for comments about how factory farming isn't really all that bad!