Meat

November 21, 2000

I posted this awhile ago, but didnt really get a

response... I researched the Chimpanzee diet since they are the

closest Ape to us genetically (about 97%+). While they

eat mostly fruit and vegetables, they DO eat meat in

small amounts. It is usually baby monkeys that they

eat. I believe meat was 5% of their diet. Also, the

Chimps that ate the monkeys had a higher offspring

success rate. I dont even like meat, so I do not

feel that I am biased to find reasons to eat it. It is

just my goal to find the truth. Also, the real

problem seems to be the kind of meat available. It should

be organic and hormone free. Then in this day and

age we have to cook it, at least I couldnt handle

meat raw! I actually read that the Eskimos were very

healthy, at least those that were not influenced by

Western diets. They ate tons of raw whale meat and

blubber and had no heart disease. I've seen many

raw food authors compare us to the Gorillas who they

claim do not eat meat (I dont know either way). But why

wouldn't they compare us to the Ape that is our closest

genetic cousin instead? Perhaps, they are more interested

in making their point than discovering the

truth. So if we eat small amounts of organic cooked meat

(including foul and fish) with digestive enzymes, it seems

that would be the closest to what our bodies

need. Raven PS. I'm still waiting for the sunfood diet system

book! In the meantime I've been almost 100% raw - the

only exception being small amounts of meat every few

days! It's great at times, but other times it's very

difficult. I've been at this for over two weeks now and

still hanging on.

November 21, 2000

Why eat, meat at all? We don't need it. Our

digestive sytems are wrong for digesting meat, certainly

when it is raw, We are the 'highest' animal and are I

hope intelligent enough to realise that we don't need

it, we should be humane enough to realise that as we

don't need it then we shouldn't cause suffereing to

animals. Rearing animals is terribly wasteful on land

space, it uses up resouces 5 to 25 times as much as not

eating animals. If people really feel they must eat

animals they should wait till they die naturally. I don't

object in any way to people eating animals that have

died a natural death, if they want to that is! I just

don't see animals should have to suffer just to satisfy

desires of humans. Why live an unhealthy life style?

Chris.

November 21, 2000

Raven; I remember this post from a while ago,

and I responded to it, I will do it again. Not all

chimps ate meat. The Chimps that ate meat were the

UNHEALTHY chimps of the group. A higher birth rate is a

sign of poor health, just as a plant produces more

seeds when under stress. This idea of sexual activity

being a sign of good health is cooked food

missinformation. There are a lot of people in society who are

considered to be exceptionaly healthy, who live on McDonalds

hamburgers. Eskimos had no cardiovascular problems, but there is no

evedence that they were exceptionaly healthy. Eskimos did

not have the opportunity to eat fruits and

vegetables. All life on the earth is opportunistic. All life

consumes what is avalible. Humans begain eating meat

because they moved into colder climates where fruits and

vegetables were not avalible. Just because they ate meat,

and survived on it, does not mean it was the best

thing to eat. I still do not understand why you

eat meat. Isen't this great look at all this

activity on this board; Doug

November 22, 2000

Yes, I recall your reply to my message the first

time and I was being polite by ignoring it because it

is an absurd argument! You're really

grasping there with this argument. The meat eating chimps

did not have an increase in their population - they

had a higher success rate of births, meaning the

mother and/or child did not die as often as they did

before they ate the meat. Comparing us to plants

is not a reasonable analogy. Like I've said,

I'm only interested in the truth, and it seems to me

that you are just acting out of fanaticism rather than

truly seeking the truth on this issue. The best

argument against this is that we cook our meat, which the

animals do not do. (which is why I would take the

enzymes, Ladybugg, because we are not being totally

natural by eating it cooked) As far as our

intestines and teeth not being that of a carnivor - of

course they're not. I'm not saying we're carnivors, I'm

only suggesting a small amount of meat. Also,

the true herbivores are able to digest cellulose,

which we are not. I'm not that into eating meat

anyway. Like I said I dont even like it. I just think the

goal is to learn the truth, whether we like it or

not. And I agree Ladybugg, eating 98% raw is still

extremely healthy, and the meat, fish and foul I am

suggesting is beneficial in my opinion. Not eating

meat because you dont want to kill animals is a

completely different issue. This has been my main reason for

being a vegetarian many times in my life. However, I am

convinced that the real tragedy in the meat industry is how

the animals are treated before they are killed. We

should make sure they are treated humanely (free range,

etc). So, buying these kinds of products would do more

for the animals than being a vegetarian, since the

rest of the world is so into eating meat you would not

even put a dent in the industry. Raven

November 23, 2000

OK, you win, go ahead eat meat, even though you don't like it. Being the fanatic

that I am, I won't. Doug

November 23, 2000

I found this on the web. Meat is not 5% of the

chimpanzees diet. Most of that 5% is made up of insects. Bon

app'etit. Here is the link to the

page; <a href=http://www.oaklandzoo.org/atoz/azchimp.html

target=new>http://www.oaklandzoo.org/atoz/azchimp.html</a> III. DIET:

Feed on a wide variety of

foodstuffs (over 80 different items have been catalogued)

with the largest proportion consisting of fruit

and young leaves. In long dry seasons, buds and

blossoms, soft pitch, stems, galls, honey, bark and

resin, seeds and nuts are also eaten. Animal prey makes

up as much as five percent of the diet, with social

insects, such as ants and termites, providing the

largest amounts. On rare occasions small game (monkeys,

pigs, and antelope) is hunted. Feeding is

essentially an individual activity, but after a cooperative

hunt may share morsels in response to begging by

others. There seem to be " cultural " differences between

groups of chimpanzees in the variety of food taken and

the techniques for processing it. (West African

chimps use wood and stone tools as hammers to open

nuts.)

November 23, 2000

Ok, well now we're looking for the truth! I like

to find out the truth directly like on these sites

instead of listening to an author tell me second

hand. I'll have to find the website that I read and

figure out why they are different. I read it many months

ago and on a different computer so it might take me

awhile to dig it up. And no, I'm not eating

insects, even if it means I will not be as healthy as I

could be! Raven

July 7, 2003

I think we may have something to learn if we have people posting in the

group that don't exactly agree with us.

Personally I like to read as much about health and nutrition as I can.

I've learned much from reading books that weren't about raw foods only.

Reading the book, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration was enlightening.

In it Dr. Price recommends and believes that we need certain animal food

factors for the best health. But I also realize the limitations in his

argument. He was studying nutrition in the 1930's and 40's. He didn't

understand that all the animals got their nutrition from raw plant

foods. He didn't know anything about vegetarian nutritional science.

I've also read a very interesting book by Aajonus Vonderplanitz. He's

the guy who eats raw but also includes many raw animal products in his

diet. Again I learned much from reading that book. I even bought some

raw meat and ate it. But it really disgusted me and I quickly realized

we were not designed to eat meat. At least this is my current viewpoint

on it. Most of the evidence I've read points to that.

Of course my beliefs about nutrition are also based on my particular

beliefs in general. I disagree with the whole theory of evolution for

instance. I don't think it actually works in nature. If you study it or

read some counter opinions to that of the evolutionists you'll see that

it just doesn't make sense. Before I read this I was like most people

and believed in evolution. But it still is a theory to this day and

always will be.

I've also had a former long time vegetarian and raw foodist email me all

sorts of links about why eating vegetarian isn't the best way to go. Of

course I was already familiar with much of this literature, but not all

of it. I guess I don't have the time to read every single thing that is

out there. But it is good to see where people are coming from and see if

our current theory stands up to the truth of cause and effect.

What if eating a vegetarian diet really is unhealthy? No matter how

logical it seems people may be experiencing deficiencies without meat.

At least that is the viewpoint of some of these authors like Tom

Billings.

By the way I'll post some links on articles refuting the teachings of

Tom Billings by some nutritional scientists. You can decide for

yourself. I think his website is http://www.beyondveg.com

<http://www.beyondveg.com/> . Found an interesting website promoting

veganism www.beyondvegetarian.com <http://www.beyondvegetarian.com/> .

Here are the links for the articles analyzing Tom Billings' approach.

http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/johnc.htm

http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/polemics.htm

http://www.vegsource.com/talk/raw/messages/1389.html

Arguments or debates on nutrition will actually help us become stronger

in our own understanding. Though if we had constant wars on here, I

don't think that we be too good either.

Roger

July 7, 2003

Roger;

My position is that as raw fooders we get a lot of crap from our

friends and family. I don't think we need confrontation in this club.

Also I just don't think this is a good club for him. He may find

another club that eats meat. A place where he would be much happier.

Doug

rawfood , " Roger Haeske " <roger@s...> wrote:

> I think we may have something to learn if we have people posting in

the

> group that don't exactly agree with us.

>

> Personally I like to read as much about health and nutrition as I

can.

> I've learned much from reading books that weren't about raw foods

only.

> Reading the book, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration was

enlightening.

> In it Dr. Price recommends and believes that we need certain animal

food

> factors for the best health. But I also realize the limitations in

his

> argument. He was studying nutrition in the 1930's and 40's. He

didn't

> understand that all the animals got their nutrition from raw plant

> foods. He didn't know anything about vegetarian nutritional

science.

>

> I've also read a very interesting book by Aajonus Vonderplanitz.

He's

> the guy who eats raw but also includes many raw animal products in

his

> diet. Again I learned much from reading that book. I even bought

some

> raw meat and ate it. But it really disgusted me and I quickly

realized

> we were not designed to eat meat. At least this is my current

viewpoint

> on it. Most of the evidence I've read points to that.

>

> Of course my beliefs about nutrition are also based on my particular

> beliefs in general. I disagree with the whole theory of evolution

for

> instance. I don't think it actually works in nature. If you study

it or

> read some counter opinions to that of the evolutionists you'll see

that

> it just doesn't make sense. Before I read this I was like most

people

> and believed in evolution. But it still is a theory to this day and

> always will be.

>

> I've also had a former long time vegetarian and raw foodist email

me all

> sorts of links about why eating vegetarian isn't the best way to

go. Of

> course I was already familiar with much of this literature, but not

all

> of it. I guess I don't have the time to read every single thing

that is

> out there. But it is good to see where people are coming from and

see if

> our current theory stands up to the truth of cause and effect.

>

> What if eating a vegetarian diet really is unhealthy? No matter how

> logical it seems people may be experiencing deficiencies without

meat.

> At least that is the viewpoint of some of these authors like Tom

> Billings.

>

> By the way I'll post some links on articles refuting the teachings

of

> Tom Billings by some nutritional scientists. You can decide for

> yourself. I think his website is http://www.beyondveg.com

> <http://www.beyondveg.com/> . Found an interesting website promoting

> veganism www.beyondvegetarian.com

<http://www.beyondvegetarian.com/> .

>

> Here are the links for the articles analyzing Tom Billings'

approach.

> http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/johnc.htm

> http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/polemics.htm

> http://www.vegsource.com/talk/raw/messages/1389.html

>

> Arguments or debates on nutrition will actually help us become

stronger

> in our own understanding. Though if we had constant wars on here, I

> don't think that we be too good either.

>

> Roger

>

July 7, 2003

Roger;

My position is that as raw fooders we get a lot of crap from our

friends and family. I don't think we need confrontation in this club.

Also I just don't think this is a good club for him. He may find

another club that eats meat. A place where he would be much happier.

[RH]

Yes I agree there must be a group more suited to Dave’s current views on

nutrition. Though I wouldn’t mind a friendly debate if someone wanted to

do so. I just feel it makes me stronger.

To be great in tennis for instance, you have to have great competition.

Otherwise you would never develop your full potential. Maybe this isn’t

the right place for a friendly debate. I’d be interested in what others

have to say about that.

Roger

Doug

rawfood , " Roger Haeske " <roger@s...> wrote:

> I think we may have something to learn if we have people posting in

the

> group that don't exactly agree with us.

>

> Personally I like to read as much about health and nutrition as I

can.

> I've learned much from reading books that weren't about raw foods

only.

> Reading the book, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration was

enlightening.

> In it Dr. Price recommends and believes that we need certain animal

food

> factors for the best health. But I also realize the limitations in

his

> argument. He was studying nutrition in the 1930's and 40's. He

didn't

> understand that all the animals got their nutrition from raw plant

> foods. He didn't know anything about vegetarian nutritional

science.

>

> I've also read a very interesting book by Aajonus Vonderplanitz.

He's

> the guy who eats raw but also includes many raw animal products in

his

> diet. Again I learned much from reading that book. I even bought

some

> raw meat and ate it. But it really disgusted me and I quickly

realized

> we were not designed to eat meat. At least this is my current

viewpoint

> on it. Most of the evidence I've read points to that.

>

> Of course my beliefs about nutrition are also based on my particular

> beliefs in general. I disagree with the whole theory of evolution

for

> instance. I don't think it actually works in nature. If you study

it or

> read some counter opinions to that of the evolutionists you'll see

that

> it just doesn't make sense. Before I read this I was like most

people

> and believed in evolution. But it still is a theory to this day and

> always will be.

>

> I've also had a former long time vegetarian and raw foodist email

me all

> sorts of links about why eating vegetarian isn't the best way to

go. Of

> course I was already familiar with much of this literature, but not

all

> of it. I guess I don't have the time to read every single thing

that is

> out there. But it is good to see where people are coming from and

see if

> our current theory stands up to the truth of cause and effect.

>

> What if eating a vegetarian diet really is unhealthy? No matter how

> logical it seems people may be experiencing deficiencies without

meat.

> At least that is the viewpoint of some of these authors like Tom

> Billings.

>

> By the way I'll post some links on articles refuting the teachings

of

> Tom Billings by some nutritional scientists. You can decide for

> yourself. I think his website is http://www.beyondveg.com

> <http://www.beyondveg.com/> . Found an interesting website promoting

> veganism www.beyondvegetarian.com

<http://www.beyondvegetarian.com/> .

>

> Here are the links for the articles analyzing Tom Billings'

approach.

> http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/johnc.htm

> http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/polemics.htm

> http://www.vegsource.com/talk/raw/messages/1389.html

>

> Arguments or debates on nutrition will actually help us become

stronger

> in our own understanding. Though if we had constant wars on here, I

> don't think that we be too good either.

>

> Roger

>

July 7, 2003

Roger,

I believe in tolerance too. And like you I am in search of good health

way before any diet or dogma within a diet.

I am fascinated to know what has replaced Darwinism in you mind?

Peter

Roger Haeske [roger]

07 July 2003 05:34

rawfood

[Raw Food] RE: Meat