Humans are Not Meat Eaters our bodies Prove it

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:06 pm

PostWed Dec 05, 2012 3:54 pm » by Alexrubic


Doogle wrote:
Alexrubic wrote:
Doogle wrote:Sorry Pooooooot, but meat eaters are just as likely to need supplements as non meat eaters, and in any case, said supplements are available in food state products although they are manufactured in that sense.
In fact, most meat eaters are likely to be deficient in more things than a vegan with a well structured diet.

The fact that we ALL need to supplement is partly down to intensive farming methods. For instance, Cobalamin- B12, used be obtained from microbial growth around the roots of plant based foods, but pesticides etc has done away with that.


That's just about wrong on every count! Still, let's not let facts stand in the way of a nice, warm and fuzzy fantasy!



And how is it wrong? Still, let's not make a statement, wrong or right, without a patronising little quip at the end(!)

What I said is open for debate, and it all depends on the reliability of the information, but I haven't lied or made it up.

The mainstream view is a warm, fuzzy one. But then again, mainstream nutritional advice is the tops. Patronising quip, almost.

OK, if you must have a blow by blow debunking (even though the information is posted elsewhere in the thread!):
...meat eaters are just as likely to need supplements as non meat eaters...

If by 'meat-eaters' you mean anyone on the typical western diet (SAD - standard Amerian diet - for Americans, though the pattern is typical around the 'civilised world') then that may be true if they eat the usual burgers, hotdogs and so on along with lots of commercially packaged foods like bread, cereals, cakes, cookies, etc.

However, if you mean meat-eaters in the sense of people - like me - who eat mainly meat (beef, pork, lamb, etc.), poultry, (chicken, duck, goose, etc.), fish (white and oily fish, like salmon) organ meat (like liver) and other animal derived produce like dairy, eggs, etc., then I would say not. Check the nutritional profile of any of these products on a nutritional database and you will find they are very rich in micronutrients - especially liver and eggs (they are almost natural 'supplements' in their own right).

There was a controlled experiement, lasting one year at the Bellevue Hospital, in which two men ate nothing but meat (with it's attached fat) and were judged, by the medical experts running the experiment, to be in tip-top health by the end of it (no nutritional deficiencies - not even scurvy).

...said supplements are available in food state products although they are manufactured in that sense.

If I understand you correctly you are saying that processed packaged foods (such as the aforementioned breads and cereals) are often fortified with vitamins and minerals (poorly assimilated synthetic and cheap ones at that). But that addresses my first point (above) that people on a typical diet, which includes some meat or processed meat products, also eat a lot of these devitalised junk foods that require some token fortfication.

In fact, most meat eaters are likely to be deficient in more things than a vegan with a well structured diet.

This is patently false - even for people eating the SAD. Vegansim is only viable due to the availability of nutritional supplements. No indigenous population has ever been truly vegan for this reason - they would have died out through malnutrition.

The fact that we ALL need to supplement is partly down to intensive farming methods.

This is only true for people who are exclusively vegan or vegetarian and rely on plant foods for nutrients. Modern farming techniques do devitalise the soil and thus the plants that grow in them. Though the differences seem major expressed as relative percentages, in absolute terms, they still usually contain a reasonable amount of water soluble vitamins. Modern animal husbandry techniques do not so significantly affect the nutritonal status of meat. Where they do, you will find this largely unique to the US where CAFO is in operation and cattle are fed on totally inappropriate feeds like Gummy Bears! Here in the EU/UK, we are able to largely pasture our livestock and we do not allow growth hormone or antibiotic supplementation. Antibiotics can only be administered where an animal is sick under the supervision of a qualified vet and the meat and milk from treated animals is not allowed to pass into the human food chain. Any treated animal has to remain antibiotic-free for a period of time that ensures any traces or metabolites of the medication are cleared from its system before being sent for slaughter or before its milk is allowed to be sold for human consumption.

For instance, Cobalamin- B12, used be obtained from microbial growth around the roots of plant based foods, but pesticides etc has done away with that.

B12 is only available from meat or a supplement. True, it is derived from bacterial action, but we could not absorb it by eating the roots of plants.

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 877
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:36 pm

PostWed Dec 05, 2012 5:04 pm » by Domeika


Vegans always feel the need to blather away at how everyone else is wrong yada yada yada. I say let them eat vegan if they want because for the rest of us meat eaters it is an investment in the future. When the economic collapse comes, food will be scarce and a corn-fed vegan done medium-well will be a welcome sight. A special thanks to all you vegans out there for following a diet to make yourselves extra tasty.....mmm...mmm...mmm.

Image

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 15836
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:12 pm

PostWed Dec 05, 2012 5:15 pm » by Spock


I know I'm posting late in this thread, and not going to read the 11 pages to catch up but...


Image
As we began to shy away from eating primarily fruit, leaves and nuts and began eating meat, our brains grew. We developed the capacity to use tools, so our need for large, sharp teeth and big grinders waned. From left, a cast of teeth from a chimpanzee, Australopithecus afarensis and a modern human.

Our earliest ancestors ate their food raw — fruit, leaves, maybe some nuts. When they ventured down onto land, they added things like underground tubers, roots and berries.

It wasn't a very high-calorie diet, so to get the energy you needed, you had to eat a lot and have a big gut to digest it all. But having a big gut has its drawbacks.

"You can't have a large brain and big guts at the same time," explains Leslie Aiello, an anthropologist and director of the Wenner-Gren Foundation in New York City, which funds research on evolution. Digestion, she says, was the energy-hog of our primate ancestor's body. The brain was the poor stepsister who got the leftovers.

Until, that is, we discovered meat.

"What we think is that this dietary change around 2.3 million years ago was one of the major significant factors in the evolution of our own species," Aiello says.

That period is when cut marks on animal bones appeared — not a predator's tooth marks, but incisions that could have been made only by a sharp tool. That's one sign of our carnivorous conversion. But Aiello's favorite clue is somewhat ickier — it's a tapeworm. "The closest relative of human tapeworms are tapeworms that affect African hyenas and wild dogs," she says.

So sometime in our evolutionary history, she explains, "we actually shared saliva with wild dogs and hyenas." That would have happened if, say, we were scavenging on the same carcass that hyenas were.

But dining with dogs was worth it. Meat is packed with lots of calories and fat. Our brain — which uses about 20 times as much energy as the equivalent amount of muscle — piped up and said, "Please, sir, I want some more."

Carving Up The Diet

As we got more, our guts shrank because we didn't need a giant vegetable processor any more. Our bodies could spend more energy on other things like building a bigger brain. Sorry, vegetarians, but eating meat apparently made our ancestors smarter — smart enough to make better tools, which in turn led to other changes, says Aiello.

"If you look in your dog's mouth and cat's mouth, and open up your own mouth, our teeth are quite different," she says. "What allows us to do what a cat or dog can do are tools."

Tools meant we didn't need big sharp teeth like other predators. Tools even made vegetable matter easier to deal with. As anthropologist Shara Bailey at New York University says, they were like "external" teeth.

"Your teeth are really for processing food, of course, but if you do all the food processing out here," she says, gesturing with her hands, "if you are grinding things, then there is less pressure for your teeth to pick up the slack."

Our teeth, jaws and mouth changed as well as our gut.

A Tough Bite To Swallow

But adding raw meat to our diet doesn't tell the whole food story, according to anthropologist Richard Wrangham. Wrangham invited me to his apartment at Harvard University to explain what he believes is the real secret to being human. All I had to do was bring the groceries, which meant a steak — which I thought could fill in for wildebeest or antelope — and a turnip, a mango, some peanuts and potatoes.

As we slice up the turnip and put the potatoes in a pot, Wrangham explains that even after we started eating meat, raw food just didn't pack the energy to build the big-brained, small-toothed modern human. He cites research that showed that people on a raw food diet, including meat and oil, lost a lot of weight. Many said they felt better, but also experienced chronic energy deficiency. And half the women in the experiment stopped menstruating.

It's not as if raw food isn't nutritious; it's just harder for the body to get at the nutrition.

Wrangham urges me to try some raw turnip. Not too bad, but hardly enough to get the juices flowing. "They've got a tremendous amount of caloric energy in them," he says. "The problem is that it's in the form of starch, which unless you cook it, does not give you very much."

Then there's all the chewing that raw food requires. Chimps, for example, sometimes chew for six hours a day. That actually consumes a lot of energy.

"Plato said if we were regular animals, you know, we wouldn't have time to write poetry," Wrangham jokes. "You know, he was right."

Tartare No More

One solution might have been to pound food, especially meat — like the steak I brought. "If our ancestors had used stones to mash the meat like this," Wrangham says as he demonstrates with a wooden mallet, "then it would have reduced the difficulty they would have had in digesting it."

But pounding isn't as good as cooking that steak, says Wrangham. And cooking is what he thinks really changed our modern body. Someone discovered fire — no one knows exactly when — and then someone got around to putting steak and veggies on the barbeque. And people said, "Hey, let's do that again."

Besides better taste, cooked food had other benefits — cooking killed some pathogens on food.

But cooking also altered the meat itself. It breaks up the long protein chains, and that makes them easier for stomach enzymes to digest. "The second thing is very clear," Wrangham adds, "and that is the muscle, which is made of protein, is wrapped up like a sausage in a skin, and the skin is collagen, connective tissue. And that collagen is very hard to digest. But if you heat it, it turns to jelly."

As for starchy foods like turnips, cooking gelatinizes the tough starch granules and makes them easier to digest too. Even just softening food — which cooking does — makes it more digestible. In the end, you get more energy out of the food.

Yes, cooking can damage some good things in raw food, like vitamins. But Wrangham argues that what's gained by cooking far outweighs the losses.

As I cut into my steak (Wrangham is a vegetarian; he settles for the mango and potatoes), Wrangham explains that cooking also led to some of the finer elements of human behavior: it encourages people to share labor; it brings families and communities together at the end of the day and encourages conversation and story-telling — all very human activities.

"Ultimately, of course, what makes us intellectually human is our brain," he says. "And I think that comes from having the highest quality of food in the animal kingdom, and that's because we cook."

So, as the Neanderthals liked to say around the campfire: bon appetit.

LINK

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 7:01 pm

PostWed Dec 05, 2012 5:34 pm » by Kaarmaa


Kaarmaa wrote:


Upload to Disclose.tv



A presentation by Milton Mills, M.D


The Comparative Anatomy of Eating

Humans are most often described as "omnivores." This classification is based on the "observation" that humans generally eat a wide variety of plant and animal foods. However, culture, custom and training are confounding variables when looking at human dietary practices. Thus, "observation" is not the best technique to use when trying to identify the most "natural" diet for humans. While most humans are clearly "behavioral" omnivores, the question still remains as to whether humans are anatomically suited for a diet that includes animal as well as plant foods.

A better and more objective technique is to look at human anatomy and physiology. Mammals are anatomically and physiologically adapted to procure and consume particular kinds of diets. (It is common practice when examining fossils of extinct mammals to examine anatomical features to deduce the animal's probable diet.) Therefore, we can look at mammalian carnivores, herbivores (plant-eaters) and omnivores to see which anatomical and physiological features are associated with each kind of diet. Then we can look at human anatomy and physiology to see in which group we belong.

Oral Cavity

Carnivores have a wide mouth opening in relation to their head size. This confers obvious advantages in developing the forces used in seizing, killing and dismembering prey. Facial musculature is reduced since these muscles would hinder a wide gape, and play no part in the animal's preparation of food for swallowing. In all mammalian carnivores, the jaw joint is a simple hinge joint lying in the same plane as the teeth. This type of joint is extremely stable and acts as the pivot point for the "lever arms" formed by the upper and lower jaws. The primary muscle used for operating the jaw in carnivores is the temporalis muscle. This muscle is so massive in carnivores that it accounts for most of the bulk of the sides of the head (when you pet a dog, you are petting its temporalis muscles). The "angle" of the mandible (lower jaw) in carnivores is small. This is because the muscles (masseter and pterygoids) that attach there are of minor importance in these animals. The lower jaw of carnivores cannot move forward, and has very limited side-to-side motion. When the jaw of a carnivore closes, the blade-shaped cheek molars slide past each other to give a slicing motion that is very effective for shearing meat off bone.

The teeth of a carnivore are discretely spaced so as not to trap stringy debris. The incisors are short, pointed and prong-like and are used for grasping and shredding. The canines are greatly elongated and dagger-like for stabbing, tearing and killing prey. The molars (carnassials) are flattened and triangular with jagged edges such that they function like serrated-edged blades. Because of the hinge-type joint, when a carnivore closes its jaw, the cheek teeth come together in a back-to-front fashion giving a smooth cutting motion like the blades on a pair of shears.

The saliva of carnivorous animals does not contain digestive enzymes. When eating, a mammalian carnivore gorges itself rapidly and does not chew its food. Since proteolytic (protein-digesting) enzymes cannot be liberated in the mouth due to the danger of autodigestion (damaging the oral cavity), carnivores do not need to mix their food with saliva; they simply bite off huge chunks of meat and swallow them whole.

According to evolutionary theory, the anatomical features consistent with an herbivorous diet represent a more recently derived condition than that of the carnivore. Herbivorous mammals have well-developed facial musculature, fleshy lips, a relatively small opening into the oral cavity and a thickened, muscular tongue. The lips aid in the movement of food into the mouth and, along with the facial (cheek) musculature and tongue, assist in the chewing of food. In herbivores, the jaw joint has moved to position above the plane of the teeth. Although this type of joint is less stable than the hinge-type joint of the carnivore, it is much more mobile and allows the complex jaw motions needed when chewing plant foods. Additionally, this type of jaw joint allows the upper and lower cheek teeth to come together along the length of the jaw more or less at once when the mouth is closed in order to form grinding platforms. (This type of joint is so important to a plant-eating animal, that it is believed to have evolved at least 15 different times in various plant-eating mammalian species.) The angle of the mandible has expanded to provide a broad area of attachment for the well-developed masseter and pterygoid muscles (these are the major muscles of chewing in plant-eating animals). The temporalis muscle is small and of minor importance. The masseter and pterygoid muscles hold the mandible in a sling-like arrangement and swing the jaw from side-to-side. Accordingly, the lower jaw of plant-eating mammals has a pronounced sideways motion when eating. This lateral movement is necessary for the grinding motion of chewing.

The dentition of herbivores is quite varied depending on the kind of vegetation a particular species is adapted to eat. Although these animals differ in the types and numbers of teeth they posses, the various kinds of teeth when present, share common structural features. The incisors are broad, flattened and spade-like. Canines may be small as in horses, prominent as in hippos, pigs and some primates (these are thought to be used for defense) or absent altogether. The molars, in general, are squared and flattened on top to provide a grinding surface. The molars cannot vertically slide past one another in a shearing/slicing motion, but they do horizontally slide across one another to crush and grind. The surface features of the molars vary depending on the type of plant material the animal eats. The teeth of herbivorous animals are closely grouped so that the incisors form an efficient cropping/biting mechanism, and the upper and lower molars form extended platforms for crushing and grinding. The "walled-in" oral cavity has a lot of potential space that is realized during eating.

These animals carefully and methodically chew their food, pushing the food back and forth into the grinding teeth with the tongue and cheek muscles. This thorough process is necessary to mechanically disrupt plant cell walls in order to release the digestible intracellular contents and ensure thorough mixing of this material with their saliva. This is important because the saliva of plant-eating mammals often contains carbohydrate-digesting enzymes which begin breaking down food molecules while the food is still in the mouth.

Stomach and Small Intestine

Striking differences between carnivores and herbivores are seen in these organs. Carnivores have a capacious simple (single-chambered) stomach. The stomach volume of a carnivore represents 60-70% of the total capacity of the digestive system. Because meat is relatively easily digested, their small intestines (where absorption of food molecules takes place) are short&151;about three to five or six times the body length. Since these animals average a kill only about once a week, a large stomach volume is advantageous because it allows the animals to quickly gorge themselves when eating, taking in as much meat as possible at one time which can then be digested later while resting. Additionally, the ability of the carnivore stomach to secrete hydrochloric acid is exceptional. Carnivores are able to keep their gastric pH down around 1-2 even with food present. This is necessary to facilitate protein breakdown and to kill the abundant dangerous bacteria often found in decaying flesh foods.

Because of the relative difficulty with which various kinds of plant foods are broken down (due to large amounts of indigestible fibers), herbivores have significantly longer and in some cases, far more elaborate guts than carnivores. Herbivorous animals that consume plants containing a high proportion of cellulose must "ferment" (digest by bacterial enzyme action) their food to obtain the nutrient value. They are classified as either "ruminants" (foregut fermenters) or hindgut fermenters. The ruminants are the plant-eating animals with the celebrated multiple-chambered stomachs. Herbivorous animals that eat a diet of relatively soft vegetation do not need a multiple-chambered stomach. They typically have a simple stomach, and a long small intestine. These animals ferment the difficult-to-digest fibrous portions of their diets in their hindguts (colons). Many of these herbivores increase the sophistication and efficiency of their GI tracts by including carbohydrate-digesting enzymes in their saliva. A multiple-stomach fermentation process in an animal which consumed a diet of soft, pulpy vegetation would be energetically wasteful. Nutrients and calories would be consumed by the fermenting bacteria and protozoa before reaching the small intestine for absorption. The small intestine of plant-eating animals tends to be very long (greater than 10 times body length) to allow adequate time and space for absorption of the nutrients.

Colon

The large intestine (colon) of carnivores is simple and very short, as its only purposes are to absorb salt and water. It is approximately the same diameter as the small intestine and, consequently, has a limited capacity to function as a reservoir. The colon is short and non-pouched. The muscle is distributed throughout the wall, giving the colon a smooth cylindrical appearance. Although a bacterial population is present in the colon of carnivores, its activities are essentially putrefactive.

In herbivorous animals, the large intestine tends to be a highly specialized organ involved in water and electrolyte absorption, vitamin production and absorption, and/or fermentation of fibrous plant materials. The colons of herbivores are usually wider than their small intestine and are relatively long. In some plant-eating mammals, the colon has a pouched appearance due to the arrangement of the muscle fibers in the intestinal wall. Additionally, in some herbivores the cecum (the first section of the colon) is quite large and serves as the primary or accessory fermentation site.

What About Omnivores?

One would expect an omnivore to show anatomical features which equip it to eat both animal and plant foods. According to evolutionary theory, carnivore gut structure is more primitive than herbivorous adaptations. Thus, an omnivore might be expected to be a carnivore which shows some gastrointestinal tract adaptations to an herbivorous diet.

This is exactly the situation we find in the Bear, Raccoon and certain members of the Canine families. (This discussion will be limited to bears because they are, in general, representative of the anatomical omnivores.) Bears are classified as carnivores but are classic anatomical omnivores. Although they eat some animal foods, bears are primarily herbivorous with 70-80% of their diet comprised of plant foods. (The one exception is the Polar bear which lives in the frozen, vegetation poor arctic and feeds primarily on seal blubber.) Bears cannot digest fibrous vegetation well, and therefore, are highly selective feeders. Their diet is dominated by primarily succulent lent herbage, tubers and berries. Many scientists believe the reason bears hibernate is because their chief food (succulent vegetation) not available in the cold northern winters. (Interestingly, Polar bears hibernate during the summer months when seals are unavailable.)

In general, bears exhibit anatomical features consistent with a carnivorous diet. The jaw joint of bears is in the same plane as the molar teeth. The temporalis muscle is massive, and the angle of the mandible is small corresponding to the limited role the pterygoid and masseter muscles play in operating the jaw. The small intestine is short (less than five times body length) like that of the pure carnivores, and the colon is simple, smooth and short. The most prominent adaptation to an herbivorous diet in bears (and other "anatomical" omnivores) is the modification of their dentition. Bears retain the peg-like incisors, large canines and shearing premolars of a carnivore; but the molars have become squared with rounded cusps for crushing and grinding. Bears have not, however, adopted the flattened, blunt nails seen in most herbivores and retain the elongated, pointed claws of a carnivore.

An animal which captures, kills and eats prey must have the physical equipment which makes predation practical and efficient. Since bears include significant amounts of meat in their diet, they must retain the anatomical features that permit them to capture and kill prey animals. Hence, bears have a jaw structure, musculature and dentition which enable them to develop and apply the forces necessary to kill and dismember prey even though the majority of their diet is comprised of plant foods. Although an herbivore-style jaw joint (above the plane of the teeth) is a far more efficient joint for crushing and grinding vegetation and would potentially allow bears to exploit a wider range of plant foods in their diet, it is a much weaker joint than the hinge-style carnivore joint. The herbivore-style jaw joint is relatively easily dislocated and would not hold up well under the stresses of subduing struggling prey and/or crushing bones (nor would it allow the wide gape carnivores need). In the wild, an animal with a dislocated jaw would either soon starve to death or be eaten by something else and would, therefore, be selected against. A given species cannot adopt the weaker but more mobile and efficient herbivore-style joint until it has committed to an essentially plant-food diet test it risk jaw dislocation, death and ultimately, extinction.

What About Me?

The human gastrointestinal tract features the anatomical modifications consistent with an herbivorous diet. Humans have muscular lips and a small opening into the oral cavity. Many of the so-called "muscles of expression" are actually the muscles used in chewing. The muscular and agile tongue essential for eating, has adapted to use in speech and other things. The mandibular joint is flattened by a cartilaginous plate and is located well above the plane of the teeth. The temporalis muscle is reduced. The characteristic "square jaw" of adult males reflects the expanded angular process of the mandible and the enlarged masseter/pterygoid muscle group. The human mandible can move forward to engage the incisors, and side-to-side to crush and grind.

Human teeth are also similar to those found in other herbivores with the exception of the canines (the canines of some of the apes are elongated and are thought to be used for display and/or defense). Our teeth are rather large and usually abut against one another. The incisors are flat and spade-like, useful for peeling, snipping and biting relatively soft materials. The canines are neither serrated nor conical, but are flattened, blunt and small and function Like incisors. The premolars and molars are squarish, flattened and nodular, and used for crushing, grinding and pulping noncoarse foods.

Human saliva contains the carbohydrate-digesting enzyme, salivary amylase. This enzyme is responsible for the majority of starch digestion. The esophagus is narrow and suited to small, soft balls of thoroughly chewed food. Eating quickly, attempting to swallow a large amount of food or swallowing fibrous and/or poorly chewed food (meat is the most frequent culprit) often results in choking in humans.

Man's stomach is single-chambered, but only moderately acidic. (Clinically, a person presenting with a gastric pH less than 4-5 when there is food in the stomach is cause for concern.) The stomach volume represents about 21-27% of the total volume of the human GI tract. The stomach serves as a mixing and storage chamber, mixing and liquefying ingested foodstuffs and regulating their entry into the small intestine. The human small intestine is long, averaging from 10 to 11 times the body length. (Our small intestine averages 22 to 30 feet in length. Human body size is measured from the top of the head to end of the spine and averages between two to three feet in length in normal-sized individuals.)

The human colon demonstrates the pouched structure peculiar to herbivores. The distensible large intestine is larger in cross-section than the small intestine, and is relatively long. Man's colon is responsible for water and electrolyte absorption and vitamin production and absorption. There is also extensive bacterial fermentation of fibrous plant materials, with the production and absorption of significant amounts of food energy (volatile short-chain fatty acids) depending upon the fiber content of the diet. The extent to which the fermentation and absorption of metabolites takes place in the human colon has only recently begun to be investigated.

In conclusion, we see that human beings have the gastrointestinal tract structure of a "committed" herbivore. Humankind does not show the mixed structural features one expects and finds in anatomical omnivores such as bears and raccoons. Thus, from comparing the gastrointestinal tract of humans to that of carnivores, herbivores and omnivores we must conclude that humankind's GI tract is designed for a purely plant-food diet.

Conspirator
Posts: 1579
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 7:18 pm

PostSat Dec 08, 2012 10:32 pm » by Doogle


Alexrubic wrote:OK, if you must have a blow by blow debunking (even though the information is posted elsewhere in the thread!):
...meat eaters are just as likely to need supplements as non meat eaters...

If by 'meat-eaters' you mean anyone on the typical western diet (SAD - standard Amerian diet - for Americans, though the pattern is typical around the 'civilised world') then that may be true if they eat the usual burgers, hotdogs and so on along with lots of commercially packaged foods like bread, cereals, cakes, cookies, etc.

However, if you mean meat-eaters in the sense of people - like me - who eat mainly meat (beef, pork, lamb, etc.), poultry, (chicken, duck, goose, etc.), fish (white and oily fish, like salmon) organ meat (like liver) and other animal derived produce like dairy, eggs, etc., then I would say not. Check the nutritional profile of any of these products on a nutritional database and you will find they are very rich in micronutrients - especially liver and eggs (they are almost natural 'supplements' in their own right).

There was a controlled experiement, lasting one year at the Bellevue Hospital, in which two men ate nothing but meat (with it's attached fat) and were judged, by the medical experts running the experiment, to be in tip-top health by the end of it (no nutritional deficiencies - not even scurvy).

...said supplements are available in food state products although they are manufactured in that sense.

If I understand you correctly you are saying that processed packaged foods (such as the aforementioned breads and cereals) are often fortified with vitamins and minerals (poorly assimilated synthetic and cheap ones at that). But that addresses my first point (above) that people on a typical diet, which includes some meat or processed meat products, also eat a lot of these devitalised junk foods that require some token fortfication.

In fact, most meat eaters are likely to be deficient in more things than a vegan with a well structured diet.

This is patently false - even for people eating the SAD. Vegansim is only viable due to the availability of nutritional supplements. No indigenous population has ever been truly vegan for this reason - they would have died out through malnutrition.

The fact that we ALL need to supplement is partly down to intensive farming methods.

This is only true for people who are exclusively vegan or vegetarian and rely on plant foods for nutrients. Modern farming techniques do devitalise the soil and thus the plants that grow in them. Though the differences seem major expressed as relative percentages, in absolute terms, they still usually contain a reasonable amount of water soluble vitamins. Modern animal husbandry techniques do not so significantly affect the nutritonal status of meat. Where they do, you will find this largely unique to the US where CAFO is in operation and cattle are fed on totally inappropriate feeds like Gummy Bears! Here in the EU/UK, we are able to largely pasture our livestock and we do not allow growth hormone or antibiotic supplementation. Antibiotics can only be administered where an animal is sick under the supervision of a qualified vet and the meat and milk from treated animals is not allowed to pass into the human food chain. Any treated animal has to remain antibiotic-free for a period of time that ensures any traces or metabolites of the medication are cleared from its system before being sent for slaughter or before its milk is allowed to be sold for human consumption.

For instance, Cobalamin- B12, used be obtained from microbial growth around the roots of plant based foods, but pesticides etc has done away with that.

B12 is only available from meat or a supplement. True, it is derived from bacterial action, but we could not absorb it by eating the roots of plants.


You say my post was one of fantasy and wrong, yet agree in principle with a couple of points.
Yes, I was referring to a poorly thought out meat based diet, but I was answering a post that made no distinction between a typical western vegetarian diet, which is a poor one, and well balanced vegetarian diet.

And, B12 is only obtained from meat due to the diet of the animal used, it isn't a meat borne constituent.
Besides, eating meat and dairy is no guarantee of good B12 status -

http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2000/000802.htm

In a study, one of many and no I can't be arsed to post a link either or to refer to my notes (some of the journals are copyrighted anyway and not freely accessible), a cross section of meat eaters and non-meat eaters that were thought to have a well thought out diet due to questionnaires, found that the non-meat eaters were deficient in 3 nutrients whereas the meat eaters were deficient in 7.
Lifestyle and/or environmental influences were probably not taken into account.

In any case, food quality, toxins, disease and other co-factors all have to be taken into account, even the best planned diets can be helped with supplementation due to the often reduced nutrient quality of modern foodstuffs. That said, deficiency doesn't usually manifest itself until symptoms are evident and meat eater or not, one wouldn't necessarily know if one was deficient until such symptoms presented unless a diagnostics protocol was initiated. A diet with the EMPHASIS on meat is highly likely to be deficient in nutrients only obtained from plant based foods and would require supplementation, the same as a B12 supplementation for non-animal diets.

But, there is also research that shows that certain people, or even specific communities, become super efficient at absorbing the essential nutrients required, and seeing as B12 is stored partially in the liver for anything from 3 years to 30 years - depending on the study- along with passive absorption and recirculation, it may not need to be such an issue especially when incidental intake is considered.

Anyway, there are pharmaceutical grade, totally food grade supplements only available to practitioners, but yes, they're still supplements I suppose.

My nutrient status is taking a beating now. :cheers:

Writer
User avatar
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:27 pm

PostSun Dec 09, 2012 12:27 am » by Fingolfin


Monkeys eat MEAT!

Somewhere in all this mess, i read the the Apes do not eat meat and that is the reason we shouldn't either..i guess it was never researched.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/03/100305-first-proof-gorillas-eat-monkeys-mammals-feces-dna/

Jane Goodall observed the meateating but reported only sparsly.. Urban Myths that the great apes do not eat meat, every chance they get they do.....only difference they don't cook it!

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 1060
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:51 pm
Location: Netherlands

PostThu Dec 13, 2012 9:32 pm » by Seriouscitizen


nice article on protein packed plants, for the vegans/vegetarians:

http://gentleworld.org/10-protein-packed-plants/
The continuing debate over how much protein the average person needs* has done little to change our hunger for it. And who can blame us? Protein is one of the basic building blocks of life.

When most people think about protein, images of cheese, eggs and a leg of lamb pop into their head. Did you know though that every – yes, every – whole food contains protein? From your morning banana to your evening salad, finding plants packed with protein is easy to do. And not only is it easy to do, it’s easy for your body to use.

Plant-based foods are free from cholesterol, tend to be high in fiber, and are often alkalizing to the body. All animal products, on the other hand, are devoid of fiber, and are acidifying to the body, which causes calcium to be leached from your bones, as well as decreasing oxygen levels in the blood, and negatively impacting the digestive/lymphatic system.

You may have heard the ongoing debate about “complete” or “incomplete” protein and “food combining”, but be wary; these topics are steeped in misinformation and myth. Here’s what I’ve discovered thus far:

The term “complete protein” refers to foods that have all nine essential amino acids present in the correct proportion for our bodies to build protein with. The term “incomplete protein” refers to foods which have all the essential amino acids, but are simply low in one or more of them. This is called the “limiting amino acid”. While it’s true that most whole plant foods have one or more limiting amino acids and are thus “incomplete”, this shouldn’t send you running for a steak. Our bodies are brilliant, and every food that goes into your system must be broken apart and its nutrients absorbed. During the digestion process, amino acid chains from all sources are broken down and made ready for our bodies to use. If you’re eating a good mix of fruits, veggies, grains and legumes, then your body simply collects what it needs from the “amino soup” that your digestion system has absorbed. There are a growing number of vegan bodybuilders, ultra marathon runners and award-winning athletes out there to prove that meeting your protein needs on a plant-based diet is simple and successful.

Since every whole food has protein in it, you have literally millions of great options to choose from when it comes to creating a balanced diet with the right percentage of protein for your body*. I’ve selected ten nutritious plants to get you started, for both their protein content and other health benefits. You may be surprised at some of the veggies, nuts and grains that made it onto my list.

*More is not necessarily better when it comes to protein. The Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for the average, sedentary adult is only 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight. Some healthcare professionals argue that this level is too high. No matter whose recommendation you choose to follow, the fact is that each person’s protein needs are different, but all can be met with a plant-based diet... more: http://gentleworld.org/10-protein-packed-plants/


For examples of plants and their nutrition, click the link

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7683
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostThu Dec 13, 2012 9:49 pm » by 99socks


Actually, the one thing we are truly not designed for... is grains.

We were not meant to eat grains.
Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7683
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostThu Dec 13, 2012 10:05 pm » by 99socks


This is scary....


You may have heard the ongoing debate about “complete” or “incomplete” protein and “food combining”, but be wary; these topics are steeped in misinformation and myth. Here’s what I’ve discovered thus far:

The term “complete protein” refers to foods that have all nine essential amino acids present in the correct proportion for our bodies to build protein with. The term “incomplete protein” refers to foods which have all the essential amino acids, but are simply low in one or more of them. This is called the “limiting amino acid”. While it’s true that most whole plant foods have one or more limiting amino acids and are thus “incomplete”, this shouldn’t send you running for a steak. Our bodies are brilliant, and every food that goes into your system must be broken apart and its nutrients absorbed. During the digestion process, amino acid chains from all sources are broken down and made ready for our bodies to use. If you’re eating a good mix of fruits, veggies, grains and legumes, then your body simply collects what it needs from the “amino soup” that your digestion system has absorbed. There are a growing number of vegan bodybuilders, ultra marathon runners and award-winning athletes out there to prove that meeting your protein needs on a plant-based diet is simple and successful.




We don't require amino acids in the same ratios as they are available in nature. While the body may be able to break down food and turn it into what it needs, the fact of the matter is, there are several amino acids that the body cannot make. This mistake gets overlooked so much in vegetarian circles... an amino acid is not an amino acid is not an amino acid.

And I am not convinced vegetarians are healthier people. There was a girl once in a communications class I had that was vegetarian and who chose to make her speech on vegetarianism and its "health benefits." Problem was, she was about 20 pounds under weight, had dark circles under bulging eyes, and dry, flaky skin. I really had to bite my tongue not to debunk her, in case she had some sort of eating disorder on the side that I may have made worse with my non-political correctness. :censored:

Anyhoot, I have lived with vegetarian roommates and have had vegetarian friends, and it all comes down to one thing: those who only cut meat out of their diets get sick; those who pay attention to their diets remain healthy. The short answer to all the vegetarian mumbo-jumbo is that vegetarianism appears to be healthier because those who are vegetarians are actually paying attention to their diets and their bodies as opposed to everyone else who is eating whatever and getting sick from it. Pick a diet, any diet- and in the short term, you will experience enormous health benefits. It doesn't matter if you go vegan or pick the Paleo diet- it's all the same. But over the long term, there just aren't many long-time "casual" vegetarians who have good health. If you have to pay that much attention to what you are eating and have to go through that much planning, then it (the diet) is obviously artificial! Ancient humans didn't pay attention to what they were eating- they ate what was available. Their health is attributed to variety (which got lost with the advent of agriculture).

The reason people today get sick from meat is simply because of our culture and how we raise and cook meat- it has nothing to do with the animals or meat itself. Fresh meat from animals on natural, organic diets, plenty of space and exercise, and without hormones and antibiotics cooked with fresh ingredients is a bazillion times better for you than insufficiently fermented soy-based products that jack up estrogen levels and cause malabsorption of other nutrients.

Natural folks... the solution is natural!
Image

Initiate
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 8:14 pm

PostThu Dec 13, 2012 10:41 pm » by theclarificator3


Kaarmaa wrote:Nice post!
I have an uncle who mocked me for not eating meat, he said "we have to eat meat to become big and strong!" and I asked him what about the cows, for example, big and strong animals...eating grass. He just laughed.

Fruits, Vegetables and organic food will not be there forever.
An organic/vegetarian diet requires more quantity to satisfying the human appetite.
If you try to be strong like a cow (BTW: a cow is not strong at all) you must eat like a cow, and a cow eat almost all day.
So if everyone in the planet go veggie it will be a disaster and everything green will go extinct in a few months.
It is because of meat eaters that our natural world is already there.
Meat satisfy our appetite better than veggies.
If you really want to save the planet you must eat meat.
Is not a recommendation, you have no other choice.
EAT MEAT ASAP!
Vitamin B12 is the key factor into grow strong faster.
And strong I mean muscles, because no one one will like to grow a body like a cow or an elephant.


PreviousNext

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook