Vores (WAS: Eskimo Longevity and Meat Consumption [Brief])

[Guest guest]

No, Joe and Neal, we are not omnivores. Our digestive system, typically

11-12 times the length of our torso, is quite dissimilar from that of other

omnivores and is poorly designed to process animal flesh. Our mouth, saliva,

indeed our entire system is designed to process plant-based foods, and

high-water-content foods at that. Our digestive systems CAN process other

things, but only at a very high cost, in metabolic terms.

 

Those who would eat meat make this claim, and of course they represent a

clear majority, but there is no anatomical connection to support this claim.

No amount of chanting, " The Earth is flat, the Earth is flat " will make it

so. Further, once we stop eating meat for awhile, we typically come to find

the thought of doing so repugnant; that is, we naturally and gracefully

return to our roots in Nature's design.

 

You can hold onto this belief if you wish, of course, but it is false

nonetheless.

 

Best,

Elchanan

_____

 

rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of

neal

Friday, September 14, 2007 6:43 PM

rawfood

Re: [Raw Food] Re: Eskimo Longevity and Meat Consumption [brief]

 

 

On Friday 14 September 2007 21:10, Joe Postma wrote:

> I would like to also point out that we are NOT designed as herbivores

> or frugivores. We are omnivores,

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Well, no amounting of chanting can change our being omnivorous,

either. Glad to see that art isn't lost on you. Perhaps eating meat

becomes repulsive only once you've spent years convincing yourself of

that? I know for a fact I can go months without eating meat, but when

I do eat it, it still tastes good and my physical body enjoys it and

utilizes it.

 

I agree with Neal - it is quality of life which is important, and

quality of life is about more than physical health or longevity. It

is also about experiencing life's pleasures, and I've seen many a

vegetarian heartily indulge in a succulent meat-based dished when a

special occasion arose. One simple fact is, if meat wasn't good for

us ONCE IN A WHILE, it wouldn't taste so good. We evolved having it

ONCE IN A WHILE, and it must have been very beneficial for us to do so

or else we wouldn't have evolved the natural attraction to it. It was

a scarce yet beneficial resource - we evolved the taste-attraction to

it for that reason. Show me a child or vegetarian who's mouth does

not water at the smell of bacon cooking (or BBQ whatever)...this is

basic instinct and it is there for a reason. Only those of us who've

spent years corralling our thoughts can begin to find all meat

actually physically unpalatable...but that's overkill - borderline

hysteria, and a little naive. A lot of a good thing, i.e. raw food,

is definitely good, but it is folly to make the blind leap and say it

is ALL you need period. There is no need to go that far.

 

The potential for deficiency is well, WELL known to be higher among

vegans and raw-fooders without a highly detailed attention to what

they're eating. And as it turns out, the particular deficiencies

those people have are most naturally remedied by eating meat. It also

turns out that the animal fat in the meat allows certain nutrients to

absorb more readily and efficiently. This is saying a lot.

 

But look, I'm not saying we are carnivores. Clearly, a plant based

diet is superior; but in combination with a raw-food diet, occasional

meat eating can be, and is likely, beneficial. Unfortunately, no

long-term studies or data exist in which to explore this - the China

Study does not cover it either.

 

Cheers

 

Joe

 

 

 

rawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan wrote:

>

> No, Joe and Neal, we are not omnivores. Our digestive system, typically

> 11-12 times the length of our torso, is quite dissimilar from that

of other

> omnivores and is poorly designed to process animal flesh. Our mouth,

saliva,

> indeed our entire system is designed to process plant-based foods, and

> high-water-content foods at that. Our digestive systems CAN process

other

> things, but only at a very high cost, in metabolic terms.

>

> Those who would eat meat make this claim, and of course they represent a

> clear majority, but there is no anatomical connection to support

this claim.

> No amount of chanting, " The Earth is flat, the Earth is flat " will

make it

> so. Further, once we stop eating meat for awhile, we typically come

to find

> the thought of doing so repugnant; that is, we naturally and gracefully

> return to our roots in Nature's design.

>

> You can hold onto this belief if you wish, of course, but it is false

> nonetheless.

>

> Best,

> Elchanan

> _____

>

> rawfood [rawfood ] On

Behalf Of

> neal

> Friday, September 14, 2007 6:43 PM

> rawfood

> Re: [Raw Food] Re: Eskimo Longevity and Meat Consumption

[brief]

>

>

> On Friday 14 September 2007 21:10, Joe Postma wrote:

> > I would like to also point out that we are NOT designed as herbivores

> > or frugivores. We are omnivores,

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sorry, one other thing. Enchalan said

 

" we are not omnivores. Our digestive system, typically 11-12 times the

length of our torso, is quite dissimilar from that of other omnivores

and is poorly designed to process animal flesh. "

 

Here is a science lesson on how anatomical classification works...it

is very simple:

 

Though there is variation among omnivorous species in how long their

digestive tracts are and how acidic their internal environments are,

there is MORE similarity between OUR digestive tract and OTHER

omnivorous species than there is to ANY species of either the purely

carnivorous or purely herbivorous type. Thus, we are classified among

the omnivorous type because we most closely resemble that.

 

Again, think of a cow stomach...not at all similar to a humans!

[Guest guest]

-

Joe Postma

>Show me a child or vegetarian who's mouth does

not water at the smell of bacon cooking (or BBQ whatever)...

 

My son ) Hated the taste and texture of meat until we (the adults in his

life, therefore his teachers and examples of human living) told him it was

good, then he forced himself to eat it, gagging on every bite. We trained

him to say meat is yummy, but he'll choose a banana (or other fruit) every

time. In fact, most toddlers I know choose fruit over whatever crap their

parents are trying to feed them - my neice amused my parents and hers by

eating bites of fruit in between the spagetti her mother was feeding her. A

friend's baby threw her pancake on the floor to grab my fruit salad. Also,

most women I know who've been pregnant have felt ill at the smell of meat,

cooking, cooked, or raw, at some point during their pregnancy, or even all

the way through it. Yet we force ourselves to eat it because " the baby needs

protein " .

 

Pavlov's dogs salivated not because of food, but because of the sound of a

bell - we, too, are the products of our training. We salivate because we're

trained to believe that meat is good for us. The child who has not yet been

trained, does not. This is why my son is thriving, and I'm still fighting

addictions.

 

Caron

[Guest guest]

Here is an interesting link

 

http://www.teachnet.ie/farmnet/Digestive.htm

 

It explains at the bottom that a truly herbivorous species can

manufacture ALL amino acids from the plant material they eat. Hence,

cows can live on grass and what not, while we can not. They also

manufacture all of their vitamin b12 needs, which we can also not do

for extended periods.

If one looked at a carnivorous species, they can manufacture all of

their vitamin C needs, while we can not do that.

Other than spending lots of time researching and time at the

supermarket looking for the correct combination of plants to get all

our amino acids, what is the easiest and most natural way to get them?

I'm talking natural as in you're a caveman natural, i.e., where our

genes and DNA still are...

 

I'm sorry Elchanan but you do not have your finger on the pulse of

natures design. None of us do, and to try to claim you do as a point

of argument support is...

 

In any case, Cheers

 

Joe

[Guest guest]

I certainly appreciate these sort of anecdotal reasoning methods...I

use them myself occasionally. But in the end, anecdotes are simply that.

However, that is cool hearing about kids refusing meat and pregnant

women refusing it. I've seen and heard that myself as well, and been

annoyed as the mothers shove the crap food into their child's mouth

because they are so worried the child needs more protein or calcium or

whatever.

On the other hand, I have been witness to a case where a child was

raised vegetarian by vegetarian parents, and who was sickly and pale

and week, and prone to illness. He (the child) improved when meat was

introduced. Who knows why, maybe just simple deficiencies. But

again, another anecdote.

 

This is why I always return to science. I suppose I am more

interested in eating a " natural " diet than anything else. I think an

honest analysis of our anatomy, evolutionary and written history, and

long-term nutritional needs indicates the need for a fruit and veggie

based diet, but occasionally including a small amount of meat.

 

Heck, I spend too much time defending eating meat on here...when I am

one of the biggest raw veggie fans out there. I guess the difference

is I'm NOT a fanatic. So when I see the " fanatics " making claims they

are unqualified to make or are obviously mis-informed, I like to offer

the other side of the argument. I'm open to being the " wrong " one too

though Given this is a raw food site, we find a lot of " meat is

murder " fanatics here. And I just can't stand that haha.

 

Cheers

 

Joe

 

 

rawfood , " Caron " <carongroups wrote:

>

>

> -

> Joe Postma

> >Show me a child or vegetarian who's mouth does

> not water at the smell of bacon cooking (or BBQ whatever)...

>

> My son ) Hated the taste and texture of meat until we (the adults

in his

> life, therefore his teachers and examples of human living) told him

it was

> good, then he forced himself to eat it, gagging on every bite. We

trained

> him to say meat is yummy, but he'll choose a banana (or other fruit)

every

> time. In fact, most toddlers I know choose fruit over whatever crap

their

> parents are trying to feed them - my neice amused my parents and

hers by

> eating bites of fruit in between the spagetti her mother was feeding

her. A

> friend's baby threw her pancake on the floor to grab my fruit salad.

Also,

> most women I know who've been pregnant have felt ill at the smell of

meat,

> cooking, cooked, or raw, at some point during their pregnancy, or

even all

> the way through it. Yet we force ourselves to eat it because " the

baby needs

> protein " .

>

> Pavlov's dogs salivated not because of food, but because of the

sound of a

> bell - we, too, are the products of our training. We salivate

because we're

> trained to believe that meat is good for us. The child who has not

yet been

> trained, does not. This is why my son is thriving, and I'm still

fighting

> addictions.

>

> Caron

>